IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES by Wade Mullen PHD Dissertation PDF

Copyright © 2018 Wade Mullen. All Rights Reserved.
IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED
BY EVANGELICAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE
WAKE OF AN IMAGE-THREATENING EVENT
__________________
A Dissertation
Presented to
The Faculty of
Capital Seminary and Graduate School
__________________
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
__________________
by
Wade Mullen
March 2018
APPROVAL SHEET
IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED BY
EVANGELICAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE WAKE
OF AN IMAGE-THREATENING EVENT
Wade Mullen
Read and Approved by:

This work is proudly dedicated to Sarita Mullen,
my wife, best friend, partner, and ally.
Thank you for supporting me, cheering for me, and
keeping me focused on the things that matter most.
This work is also dedicated to my children
Maya Elizabeth, Wyatt James, and Haven Joy.
May you grow up to be truth-tellers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This journey would have been unachievable if it were not for my Heavenly Father; my
Lord, Savior, and Shepherd, Jesus Christ; and my Helper, the Holy Spirit. Thank you for being a
God of great grace through this process.
Sarita, you have been so patient, so supportive, so loving, and so generous of your own
time and energy throughout this journey. Thank you for encouraging me to continue on when the
finish line was in sight. When we had to make some sacrifices, thank you for believing that God
would provide our every need.
I want to thank my family for the great help you were to us, the many times you watched
our kids when I needed to be away at school, listened to me talk about my studies, and most
importantly, prayed for me when I needed help along the way. Thank you for believing in me.
I must thank those who mentored me over the course of the past three years. You
provided me with invaluable guidance and discernment. At times, you even corrected me and
straightened my course.
To my cohort and friends at Lancaster Bible College | Capital Seminary & Graduate
School: The community we have formed has been a source of strength and joy. Thank you for
the levity, the example, and the challenge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..........................................................................................................v
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. viii
Chapter
1. RESEARCH CONCERN.................................................................................................1
Introduction to the Research Problem.....................................................................1
The Issue of Crisis .......................................................................................3
The Issue of Impression Management .........................................................4
IM in Response to Crisis ..............................................................................6
The Problem of IM and Evangelical Organizations ...................................8
The Research Gap ........................................................................................9
Research Purpose ...................................................................................................12
Research Questions ................................................................................................12
Delimitations of the Study .....................................................................................13
Terminology...........................................................................................................13
Research Assumptions ...........................................................................................15
Procedural Overview .............................................................................................16
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................17
2. PRECEDENT LITERATURE .......................................................................................18
Philosophical Foundations .....................................................................................19
i
Chapter Page
Philosophical Presuppositions ...................................................................19
Summary ....................................................................................................23
Theological Foundations ........................................................................................23
Theological Perspectives of Leadership and IM .........................................24
Summary .....................................................................................................30
Theoretical Foundations.........................................................................................30
Objective of IM ..........................................................................................31
Development of OIM Theory ....................................................................33
Threats to Organizational Image ................................................................34
The Nature of a Crisis ................................................................................36
Summary ....................................................................................................44
Historical Background of OIM ..............................................................................45
Evolution from IM to OIM ........................................................................46
Primary Areas of OIM Research................................................................55
OIM in the Wake of Image-threatening Events .....................................................56
The Marine Shale Processing Crisis ..........................................................56
The Elsbach Studies ...................................................................................58
The Findings of Marcus and Goodman .....................................................62
The Findings of McDonnell and King .......................................................64
Biblical Foundations of Leadership and IM ..........................................................66
Biblical Narrative of IM and OIM ............................................................67
Summary ...................................................................................................79
ii
Chapter Page
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................79
3. METHODOLOGICAL DESIGN ...................................................................................81
Research Question Synopsis ..................................................................................81
Research Design.....................................................................................................81
Population ..............................................................................................................82
Sample....................................................................................................................83
Limitations of Generalization ................................................................................84
Research Method ...................................................................................................85
Protocols ................................................................................................................86
Procedures ..............................................................................................................87
Data Collection Phase ................................................................................87
Creation of a Coding Frame Phase ............................................................88
Data Coding Phase .....................................................................................89
Methods of Analysis ..................................................................................91
Timeline .....................................................................................................91
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................92
4. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS ..........................................................................................93
Explanations of Protocols ......................................................................................93
Presentation of Data ...............................................................................................95
Research Question 1 ..................................................................................96
Research Question 2 ................................................................................139
iii
Chapter Page
Evaluation of the Research Design .......................................................................164
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................164
5. CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................................165
Research Purpose .................................................................................................165
Research Questions ..............................................................................................166
Research Findings ................................................................................................166
Research Implications ..........................................................................................175
Implications for Evangelical Organizations.............................................175
Implications for Those Harmed by a Crisis .............................................178
Implications for Stakeholders ..................................................................178
Research Limitations ..........................................................................................179
Recommendations for Future Research ..............................................................180
Conclusion ..........................................................................................................181
Appendices
A. REPORTS OF EVANGELICAL LEADERS

CHARGED OR CONVICTED OF A CRIME IN 2016-2017 ..................................183
B. CODING RULES ......................................................................................................226
C. CODING FRAME .....................................................................................................228
CLERGY CRIMES REFERENCE LIST ....................................................................................230
REFERENCE LIST .....................................................................................................................255
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACT UP AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power
AIM Anticipatory Impression Management
BJU Bob Jones University
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CCA Conventional Content Analysis
IM Impression Management
MSP Marine Shale Processing
MHC Mars Hill Church
NTM New Tribes Mission
OIM Organizational Impression Management
QCA Qualitative Content Analysis
SGC Sovereign Grace Churches
SGM Sovereign Grace Ministries
USA United States of America
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Taxonomy of Organizational Impression Management Tactics ........................................48
2. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by BJU ..............................................................97
3. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by SGM ...........................................................115
4. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by MHC ..........................................................124
5. Excerpts of Prosocial Behavior Tactics ...........................................................................155
6. Excerpts of Organizational Promotion Tactics ................................................................156
7. Excerpts of Flattery Tactics .............................................................................................157
8. Excerpts of Opinion Conformity Tactics .........................................................................157
9. Excerpts of Boasting Tactics ...........................................................................................158
10. Excerpts of Negative Events Misrepresented Tactics ......................................................159
11. Excerpts of Excuse Tactics ..............................................................................................160
12. BJU and MHC Uses of Flattery with Leadership ............................................................163
13. BJU and MHC Uses of Burnishing with Leadership .......................................................163
14. Reports of Protestant Pastors Charged with a Crime During the Years 2016-2017 ........184
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Impression management strategies by stakeholders (BJU) .............................................143
2. OIM strategies used with public (BJU) ...........................................................................143
3. OIM strategies used with student body (BJU) .................................................................144
4. OIM strategies used with media, victims, alumni, or employees (BJU) .........................144
5. OIM strategies by stakeholder type (SGM) .....................................................................146
6. OIM strategies used with public (SGM) ..........................................................................147
7. OIM strategies used with church members (SGM) .........................................................148
8. OIM strategies used with media (SGM) ..........................................................................148
9. OIM strategies by stakeholder type (MHC).....................................................................150
10. OIM strategies used with church members (MHC) .........................................................151
11. OIM strategies used with church leaders (MHC) ............................................................151
12. OIM strategies used with public (MHC) .........................................................................152
13. OIM strategies used with media (MHC) ..........................................................................152
14. Top OIM strategies used by each organization................................................................154
vii
ABSTRACT
IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED BY

EVANGELICALORGANIZATIONS IN THE WAKE
OF AN IMAGE-THREATENING EVENT
Wade Mullen
Capital Graduate School and Seminary, 2018
Chairperson: Angela J. Ward
This research study was concerned with image-threatening events faced by evangelical
organizations and the impression management strategies utilized in response to those events. In
recent years, numerous prominent evangelical organizations have been forced to manage their
public image in the wake of an organizational crisis. Because of the public nature of these events,
they often threaten the image, reputation, and legitimacy of the organization. In response to that
threat, organizations might choose to prioritize managing their image over managing the
problem.
This qualitative content analysis study identified and described the impression
management strategies used by certain evangelical organizations in the wake of an image-
threatening event. The study focused on organizations that met the following criteria: (1) The
organization faced an image-threatening event. (2) The organization occupied a high-profile
position within its field at the time of the event. (3) The event resulted in media coverage and
public statements made by the organizations, providing a body of content available for analysis.
(4) At the time of the event, the organization was within one of three large evangelical sectors:
local churches, institutes of education, or para-church ministries. (5) Publicly-available
statements were made by the organization to more than one type of stakeholder. The three
viii
organizations selected on the basis of these criteria include Bob Jones University, Sovereign
Grace Ministries, and Mars Hill Church.
The researcher collected content from accessible written and verbal sources, developed
categories of impression management strategies and stakeholders, divided the data into units of
coding, implement a coding process, and analyzed and reported the results. The results
demonstrate which, if any, impression management strategies were used, which strategies were
used for different stakeholder types, and if image-threatening events evoked similar strategies for
the same targets. Lastly, the researcher considered the findings in relation to theological and
biblical perspectives and reported any significant conclusions. This researcher also makes
recommendations for future research.
KEYWORDS: Impression Management, Organizational Impression Management, Crisis,

Organizational Image, Legitimacy, Image-Threatening Eve
ix
1
CHAPTER 1
RESEARCH CONCERN
This research study was concerned with image-threatening events faced by
evangelical organizations and the impression management strategies utilized in response
to those events. The study examined the growing number of publicly negative events
facing churches, para-church ministries, and institutes of higher education and sought to
identify and describe the impression management strategies used by such organizations in
the wake of a crisis that threatened their image.
Introduction to the Research Problem
In recent years, numerous prominent evangelical organizations have been forced
to manage their public image in the wake of an organizational crisis. In 2014, Mars Hill
Church (MHC) faced a crisis when its founding pastor, Mark Driscoll, faced allegations
of “bullying” and “patterns of persistent sinful behavior” (Connelly, 2014). In 2012, Bob
Jones University (BJU) commissioned an independent study to be conducted on its
response to victims of sexual violence (Godly Response to Abuse in a Christian
Environment, 2014). The findings from the study thrust BJU into crisis. Stanley (2016)
reported on a sex-abuse scandal ignited in 2011 within Sovereign Grace Ministries
(SGM), a conglomerate of churches headed by prominent pastor C. J. Mahaney. From
2009 to 2010, an investigation was conducted into allegations of abuse at New Tribes
Fanda Missionary School. The result of the investigation found that “workers NTM
placed in charge of these children were often cruel and many of the boys and girls placed
there endured sexual, physical, emotional, and spiritual abuse” (Godly Response to
Abuse in a Christian Environment, 2010).

2
Crises like these receive national attention due to the reach of the organization,
but lesser known organizations throughout the United States of America are facing the
same kind of threats to their image. As of March 9, 2018, this researcher had collected
143 media reports of pastors of Protestant evangelical churches charged with a crime in
the USA during the year 2016 and 144 media reports during the year 2017. (See
Appendix A for a table of reports of Protestant pastors charged with a crime during the
years 2016-2017). These numbers do not include crimes committed by board members,
volunteers, teachers, administrators, missionaries, or non-pastoral staff members. When
one also considers the number of evangelical organizations facing a scandal due to non-
criminal moral failure of one of its leaders, one sees a landscape filled with crises.
Because of the public nature of these events, they often threaten the image and
reputation of the organization. In response to that threat, organizations may choose to
prioritize managing their image rather than focusing on managing the problem. For
example, the Catholic Church has faced numerous investigations into its handling of
child abuse allegations (Isley, 1997).
The decision to focus on managing the organization’s image can cause negative
consequences for the both the organization and the individuals affected by the crisis.
First, the organization may become increasingly concerned with covering up evil actions
for the sake of preserving a positive appearance. Second, organizations may choose to
protect themselves by choosing not to enter into the specific details of a situation. To look
at a problem means that one is now responsible to acknowledge and respond to the
problem. For example, a person who notices a lump under their skin may choose not to
see a doctor for fear of the diagnosis. Third, as Shrivastava (1987) contended, often it is
3
the victims of a crisis that are the most profoundly impacted. However, when attention is
given by the organization to managing their image, the victims can be easily forgotten.
Fourth, organizations that choose to prioritize the management of their image may act in
ways that are destructive rather than redemptive. Fifth, the use of impression
management strategies for the purpose of deception can cause an organization to become
increasingly adept at using deceit, manipulation, and secrecy in its response to image-
threatening events. Lastly, the use of impression management to protect close relational
ties within the organization can reinforce and strengthen a clan culture mentality.
Therefore, the proposed research is significant because it has the potential to aid
organizations and individuals involved in crisis situations with an understanding of
impression management behavior and its consequences. Such an understanding may lead
organizations to respond to image-threatening events in redemptive and Christ-like ways.
The Issue of Crisis
When an organization faces a crisis of public concern, its actions during and after
that crisis are important to the impressions it presents to its stakeholders and community.
A crisis of public concern raises questions regarding the organization’s legitimacy and
therefore, ultimately, its survival (Allen & Caillouet, 1994). Shrivastava & Mitroff (1987)
defined a crisis as an event that threatens the important goals of survival and productivity
triggered by “specific low probability events that have high impact on a variety of
stakeholders” (p. 6). Leaders lose control as events happen too fast for them to manage,
as the potential for large-scale damage can no longer be easily measured, and as more and
more constituents become affected, which generates additional conflict (Shrivastas &
Mitroff, 1987).
4
When an organization faces these threats to its existence, it often employs
impression management strategies in order to create a favorable image in the eyes of its
stakeholders (Allen & Caillouet, 1994). However, when the true nature of a crisis and its
effects is covered up with impression management strategies that are intended to deceive,
the negative effects of those strategies can further threaten the legitimacy of the
organization, further put the organization’s existence at risk, and further fuel
dissatisfaction among those who have a stake in its operations.
The Issue of Impression Management
Impression management (IM) was first introduced by Goffman (1959) as the
process of creating, influencing, or manipulating an image held by an audience. He used
the metaphor of a theater play to illustrate how individuals or organizations are actors
who at any point of time are either behind the curtain or in front of the curtain. The
impressions presented to the audience represent the “front stage” version of the actor. The
actor strives to present an impression to the audience they will find agreeable. The actor
knows his relationship with the audience consists of an agreement stipulating that as long
as the actor presents what the audience wants and expects to see, the show will continue.
As the audience changes over time and as the actor reads these changes, the actor adjusts
strategies so as to maintain audience engagement. The actor, however, is a different
person “behind stage” because he is free of audience expectation and perception. Behind
the curtain, the actor develops his “front stage” performance, free in the knowledge that
the audience does not have access to what is happening behind the curtain.
With this sociological analogy as a backdrop, IM has been defined as the process
through which individuals or organizations attempt to control the impressions others form
5
of them (Gardner, 1992). Individuals and organizations behave in ways similar to the
actor on the stage who desires to portray himself favorably and minimize negative
impressions.
The possibility that strategies are not necessarily being used consciously makes
IM behaviors difficult to identify and describe. Sociologists have sought to discover
whether the process of IM is willfully and knowingly used by actors, unwittingly utilized,
or somewhere in between. Tseelon (1992) argued that IM is learned intuitively and
involves semi-conscious behavior rather than calculated strategies. As actors engage in
exchanges with targets, they intuitively and semi-consciously adjust their actions to
maintain an impression. Although an individual may not be cognizant of the specific
strategies that are being used for various targets and in various situations, that individual
is usually aware that an attempt to manage impressions is influencing his behavior.
Adding to the difficulty in identifying and describing IM strategies, studies show
that strategies are used interchangeably as actors adjust their tactics depending on the
target and the circumstance (Bozeman and Kacmar, 1997). Over time, these strategies
become learned and innate as individuals and organizations become increasingly adept at
managing the impressions others form of them. Bozeman and Kacmar (1997) analyzed
the role of consciousness in IM. They discovered that an actor may process a series of
events automatically, using scripts previously relied upon in similar situations. If the
script proves ineffectual, then the actor is likely to revert to an alternative script based on
his semi-conscious understanding of the target’s perceptions. Thus, an actor may develop
a flexible script over time that can be altered on the basis of how the target is receiving
the script (Bozeman and Kacmar, 1997).

6
Like trying to shoot and hit a moving target, accurately identifying and describing
impression management tactics is difficult. However, the more this process is understood,
the easier it is to discern, and even anticipate, the impression management tactics.
Organizations, like individuals, are concerned with the presentation of their image
or reputation and, as a result, may wittingly or unwittingly employ scripts, or strategies,
to manage their image. It is a complex process motivated by a desire to gain approval, to
gain status, and to mitigate negative images (Highhouse, Brooks, & Gregarus, 2009;
Tyler, Connaughton, Desrayaud, & Fedesco, 2012). Although research on impression
management at the individual level has been conducted and applied in various industries
using a variety of methods, few studies in comparison have been conducted at the
organizational level (Bolino, Kacmar, Turnley, & Gilstrap, 2008).
IM in Response to Crisis
The need to manage an organization’s impression is heightened when the
organization faces a crisis that tests its approval, status, or public image. When a crisis
happens, organizations and their leaders are faced with two choices when it comes time
to give an account to its stakeholders: (1) adopt truth-telling and transparency, regardless
of the impact on one’s approval, status, or image; or (2) apply both organizational-level
and individual-level impression management tactics that present an impression intended
to portray approval, status, or a positive image.
Research literature indicates that the predominant behavior enacted and re-
enacted by an organization during crisis is impression management (Cheney &
McMillan, 1990; Elsbach & Sutton, 1992; Marcus & Goodman, 1991). Organizational
impression management (OIM) is any action that is intentionally designed and carried out
7
to influence an audience’s perceptions of the organization (Elsbach, Sutton, & Principe,
1998). These strategies have been empirically identified in the social sciences research
and include ingratiation, excuses, justifications, intimidation, and apologies. These tactics
have been grouped into two primary categories by Mohamed, Gardner, & Paolillo (1999):
1. Assertive IM – proactively manage impressions about the organization,

typically by means of ingratiation and intimidation.
2. Defensive IM - reactively manage impressions about the organization,

typically by means of apologies, excuses, and justification.
Evangelical organizations operating in a public light might find truth-telling or
admissions of fault to be fatal. This fear leads to a strong motivation to maintain a
positive impression (Marcus & Goodman, 1991). Evangelical organizations might also
argue that their use of OIM tactics is motivated by a desire to protect the reputation of
Jesus Christ. This mindset can add to the compulsion evangelical organizations feel to
manage an impression.
However, when managing an impression becomes the driving force during a
crisis, organizations lose their ability to be objective and, in consequence, lack emotional
maturity and sensemaking skills (Weick, 1993). A crisis can easily disrupt the
perceptions of people in key leadership positions, causing them self-doubt and stress.
This is especially true if the organization’s identity is being threatened. Rather than
addressing the problem that has caused the crisis, the organization may choose to manage
the threat to the image of the organization. The result is often the wrong decisions being
made at the wrong time out of a desire to maintain a positive impression (Brumfield,
2012). These impression-management behaviors then become compounded over time as

8
failures become linked and amplified in a constantly changing environment inherent to
every crisis (Weick, 1993).
Although research on impression management at the organizational level has been
conducted and applied in various contexts, only a small amount of studies sought to
identify and describe these behaviors within the context of a crisis (Bolino et al., 2008).
The Problem of IM and Evangelical Organizations
Evangelical churches, para-church ministries, and Christian institutions of
education are not immune to the problem of using impression management tactics to
manage their image in the wake of a publicly negative event. The problem exists across
industries, but the evangelical arena tends to possess two particular traits that make
organizations within it more susceptible to the problem of impression management: the
existence of clan cultures and the prioritization of the protection of the organization’s
belief system or its spiritual leaders.
First, maintaining an impression during a crisis can sometimes be a symptom of
an organization that has fallen into functioning out of a clan culture. Clan cultures are
characterized by closely knit family bonds. Churches are often started by a group of
friends or family members. Church boards might consist of members who were elected to
serve based on nepotism and cronyism. This closeness heightens the tendency leadership
might have to protect friends or family members by covering up their secrets or mistakes
(Brumfield, 2012). When protecting the existence of the organization and avoiding
negative impressions becomes the driving force behind decision-making, the clan culture
is further fortified and reinforced, and the potential for mismanaging a crisis is increased.
9
Second, evangelical organizations can attempt to justify their behaviors to cover
up negative events by arguing that they are acting to protect the reputation of the church,
its leaders, its belief system, or God himself. They believe that protecting this reputation
takes preeminence. Therefore, they can seek to manage the impressions others form of
them for the purpose of protecting a reputation rather than seek to manage the problem
for the purpose of resolution.
For example, Robert Wyatt, a former assistant pastor of Agape Bible Church in
Thornton, Colorado, was charged in 2016 with repeatedly engaging in sexual intercourse
with a 12-year-old girl who attended his church. The senior pastor and the girl’s adoptive
parents agreed not to go to the police. The officer who interviewed the girl’s adoptive
father said that the father “made it clear his interest was in protecting the church and its
reputation more than protecting his daughter” (Reed, 2016).
The Research Gap
Historically, researchers have focused their investigative efforts on impression
management strategies used at the individual level, seeking to understand how actors
utilize behavioral strategies that affect the impressions made by targets. Jones and
Pittman (1982) applied individual IM strategies to organizational behavior when they
conducted studies in the areas of job interviews, performance reviews, leadership,
organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors, and management
(Bolino & Turnley, 1999; Kacmar, Harris, & Nagy, 2007; Furner, Hall, Royle, & Zinko,
2010).
The studies conducted by Jones and Pittman (1982) laid the foundation for
organizational IM behaviors. They identified five measurable IM behaviors practiced by

10
individuals in organizational settings. First, ingratiation is the label given to the behaviors
of flattery and compliments intended to manipulate others. Second, self-promotion
involves spotlighting one’s accomplishments and bringing attention to one’s competence.
Third, exemplification is the act of going above and beyond to be seen as a role model.
Fourth, intimidation involves bullying or intimidating others in order to gain power over
them. Fifth and finally, supplication involves highlighting one’s difficult circumstance,
helplessness, or incompetence in order to illicit more help, grace, or a reduced workload
(Jones & Pittman, 1982). The taxonomy developed by Jones and Pittman (1982) has been
widely utilized in research on individual IM behavior within organizational settings for
several decades (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Since those earlier studies, far more research has been conducted at the individual
level of IM than at the organizational level of IM, leaving the field of OIM “wide-open”
(Bolino et al. 2008, p. 1098). Just as individual actors evoke IM to influence the
perceptions targets have of them, organizational actors utilize IM to influence the
perceptions stakeholders have of the organization as a whole. These strategies are often
used by CEOs, boards, public relation professionals, and organizational spokespersons.
Because of the amount of research conducted at the individual level of IM,
multiple strategies have been unearthed, and various typologies have been proposed to
categorize those strategies. In contrast, relatively few studies have been conducted on
OIM; therefore, far less strategies have been empirically identified (Bolino et al., 2008).
According to Bolino et al. (2008), research that has been conducted on OIM has
focused on five areas. First, some researchers have investigated how organizations use
IM tactics defensively to regain legitimacy in the wake of controversial or image-

11
threatening events. However, no evangelical organizations have been researched to date.
This researcher is proposing a new qualitative content analysis in this area. Second, other
research has studied how organizations use IM tactics assertively to increase acceptance
of controversial decisions or practices. Third, additional studies have examined how
organizations use a wide variety of IM strategies in an attempt to generate a desired
image or to accomplish a specific goal. Fourth, a few studies have examined the role
played by the audience in exchanges involving IM tactics. Fifth and finally, there is
limited research on issues like defamation, whereby organizations use IM in an attempt to
damage the reputation of those perceived as threats (Bolino et al., 2008).
Prior studies to this proposed research used the OIM taxonomy developed by
Mohamed et al. (1999) in which organizational behaviors, labeled tactics, were identified
and categorized as direct assertive, indirect assertive, direct defensive, and indirect
defensive. Their taxonomy was based upon Jones and Pittman’s (1982) individual IM
taxonomy. Assertive tactics have been used by organizations to present a more positive
image through cause-supporting marketing, fundraisers, advertising, and intimidations
(Patelli & Pedrini, 2013). Defensive tactics have been observed in organizations’ use of
disclaimers, apologies, restitutions, downplay of severity, or other prosocial behaviors
designed to minimize the extent of the harm done or to repair a damaged image (Bolino
et al., 2008).
Within organizational impression management, only a handful of studies have
explored the use of these OIM tactics in the wake of an image-threatening event (Bolino
et al., 2008). Further, this researcher has not found any studies that apply organizational
12
impression management to evangelical organizations such as churches, para-church
ministries, and institutes of higher education.
In summary, this study contributes to OIM research by examining OIM strategies
used in the wake of an image-threatening event by organizations within a field that to
date has not been studied. Understanding OIM strategies used by organizations like
churches that are often in the public eye can offer valuable input into how organizations
that serve the public can focus their efforts on managing the problems they are facing and
not the threats to their image. In addition, many churches and para-church ministries have
faced an image-threatening event and have attempted to manage their image in the wake
of that event. Therefore, research on how OIM strategies are used to manage impressions
is both timely and relevant. This research adds significant value to both the social science
literature base on organizational impression management and to the evangelical
community.
Research Purpose
The purpose of this qualitative content analysis was to identify and describe the
impression management strategies used by certain evangelical organizations in the wake
of an image-threatening event.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1. Which, if any, impression management strategies were employed by the
organizations in the wake of image-threatening events?
2. Did the organizations use different impression management strategies for
different targets? If so, which strategies were used for different targets?
13
3. Did each image-threatening event evoke similar impression management
strategies for the same targets?
Delimitations of the Study
This study was delimited to Protestant evangelical organizations within the United
States of America that have faced an image-threatening event between the years 2010 and
2016.
This study was delimited to Protestant evangelical institutions that have received
public attention due to the crisis and have made statements concerning the crisis that are
publicly available.
Terminology
The following terms and meanings are provided in order to clarify their
operational use in this study.
Actor: The person or organization who exhibits IM behaviors (Bolino et al.,
2008).
Anticipatory tactics. The use of impression management tactics following a
publicly negative event for the purpose of preventing challenges or negative outcry (Tyler
et al., 2012).
Crisis. Shrivastava and Mitroff (1987) defined a crisis as an event that threatens
the important goals of survival and profitability triggered by “specific low probability
events that have high impact on a variety of stakeholders” (p. 6). They identified the
following characteristics of crises: (a) managers lose control over the event and often
have very little time to react to it, (b) the perception of large-scale damage or the
14
potential for large scale damage in terms that cannot be easily measured, and (c) affects
multiple stakeholders and often produces multiple crises as a result.
Direct assertive OIM tactics. These include ingratiation, intimidation,
organizational promotion, exemplification, and supplication (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Direct defensive OIM tactics. These include accounts, disclaimers, organizational
handicapping, apologies, restitution, and prosocial behavior (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Direct and indirect defensive OIM tactics. These include burying, blurring,
boosting, and belittling (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Evangelical organization. An organization that holds the Bible as the highest
authority for belief, encourages non-Christians to trust Jesus as their Savior, believes the
death of Jesus is the only sacrifice that could remove the penalty of sin, and believes that
only those who trust in Jesus Christ alone as their Savior receive God’s free gift of
salvation (Smietana, 2015).
Impression management. Impression management is the process by which
individuals present information about themselves to appear as they wish others to see
them (Giacalone, Riordan, & Rosenfield, 1995). This process includes efforts by a person
to create, maintain, protect, or alter an image held by others to influence control of
information and create a desired image (Cao, Schniederjans, & Schniederjans, 2013).
Indirect Assertive OIM tactics. These include boasting, blaring, burnishing, and
blasting (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Legitimacy. Obtaining favorable judgments of acceptance, appropriateness,
viability, and worthiness about an individual or an organization (Kacmar et al., 2007).

15
Legitimacy is gained or regained through reputation, status, and an image of integrity
(McDonnell & King, 2013).
Organization. Cooperation among two or more individuals who work together as
a performance team (Goffman, 1954).
Organizational impression management. Just as individuals are concerned with
self-presentation, organizations can take actions that are intentionally designed and
carried out to influence an audience’s perceptions of the organization (Elsbach et al.,
1998). The actions can be carried out through annual reports, press releases, public
statements, websites, and other public vehicles aimed at various stakeholders (Tyler et al.,
2012). Organizational impression management tactics are often employed to convey
legitimacy among various stakeholders (Lamertz & Martens, 2011).
Stakeholder. Anyone who has an interest in the organization, such as
shareholders, clients, customers, employees, government, media, and the community
(Bolino et al., 2008; Cao et al., 2013; Patelli & Pedrini, 2013).
Target. The person or group of people at whom the behaviors are directed (Bolino
et al., 2008).
Research Assumptions
The following assumptions were foundational to the research:
1. The researcher assumed the labels and definitions of impression management
strategies used in the precedent literature concerning IM strategies would be
appropriately applied to IM strategies used by evangelical organizations.

16
2. The researcher assumed the categories of impression management proposed
by previously created typologies would be valid and relevant to evangelical
organizations.
3. The researcher assumed sufficient data would be available for the researcher
to conduct a reliable analysis of OIM strategies used by organizations chosen
for this qualitative content analysis.
Procedural Overview
of an image-threatening event. On the basis of a proposed typology of organizational
impression management, the researcher sought to identify and describe the various OIM
tactics that certain evangelical organizations have used to attempt to protect their image
during a crisis. First, each organization was studied to identify what, if any, impression
management strategies were used during and after the image-threatening event. Second,
each coded unit of communication was investigated to determine which strategies were
used for which types of targets. Third, the findings from each of the cases were compared
to discover any similarities between strategies used for various targets.
Cases from within the evangelical industry were selected. The accounts given by
those organizations during and after the image-threatening event were analyzed using
content analysis methodology. Accounts took the form of social media posts from the
organization, sermon transcripts, public statements, investigative reports, press releases,
blog updates, and any other piece of communication that was legally available to the
public. Statements were coded and categorized based on a proposed typology of OIM
17
developed by Mohamed et al. (1999) with additional strategies identified in other
research studies. The findings were then analyzed for the purpose of answering the
research questions.
Research Question 1 sought to identify the types of impression management
strategies used by organizations in crisis. Research Question 2 sought to describe which,
if any, impression management strategies were used for different targets. Research
Question 3 sought to describe the similarities and differences between the impression
management strategies used in each of the cases and between the strategies used for
various targets.
Chapter Summary
This chapter demonstrates the need for the proposed study. This researcher
believes this study will potentially help evangelical organizations in crisis identify,
describe, and avoid any unhealthy attempts at impression management in the wake of an
image-threatening event. Also, this study can potentially equip stakeholders with the
knowledge and discernment to be able to recognize and describe impression management
strategies being used by evangelical organizations in crisis. They will then be better
equipped to respond to those strategies in ways that deter the use of impression
management strategies. This study will also contribute to the scholarly research on
organizational impression management, especially in the area of organizational response
to image-threatening events.
18
CHAPTER 2
PRECEDENT LITERATURE
The purpose of this qualitative content analysis was to identify and describe
impression management strategies used by evangelical organizations in the wake of an
image-threatening event. IM has been studied in organizational settings for the past three
decades, but most of those studies have focused on IM at the individual level of analysis
(Bolino et al., 2008). The field of OIM is relatively new and largely undiscovered. Within
that wide-open field, there is a particular dearth of research on the topic of OIM strategies
used in the wake of image-threatening events. In addition, no research to date has studied
this topic among evangelical organizations facing image-threatening events. The
following literature review supports the claim that this study adds to the growing body of
knowledge regarding OIM strategy, especially as it pertains to evangelical organizations.
The review of precedent literature includes six sections. The first section provides
philosophical foundations that guided this researcher’s approach to the study. The second
section provides theological foundations that guided this researcher’s approach to the
study. The third section examines the theoretical foundation for impression management,
beginning with a discussion on its roots in dramaturgical theory (Goffman, 1959) and
symbolic interactionist sociology theory (Cao et al., 2013). The fourth section traces the
history of IM as it evolved from individual-level analysis to organizational-level analysis,
whereby organizational actors calculatingly attempt to manage public perception to their
advantage (Patelli & Pedrini, 2013). The fifth section transitions from the macro-level to
the micro-level with a review of the OIM studies that have focused on strategies used in
19
the wake of image-threatening events. The sixth and final section provides a review and
synthesis of IM and OIM strategies identified by this researcher in the Bible.
Philosophical Foundations
It is the view of this researcher that philosophy undergirds every framework
through which a practical problem and research problem is viewed and understood. The
following section seeks to embed the problem and related social science research of OIM
strategies used in the wake of an image-threatening event within a philosophical grid.
This portion of the review includes perspectives on the philosophical bases of
metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. It also includes biblical perspectives on
organizations in crisis, impression management, truth-telling, and transparency.
Philosophical Presuppositions
Philosophical ideas influence the practice of research and thus need to be
identified (Creswell, 2014). They orient one’s view of the world and one’s approach to
research. In this section, the basic ideas behind this researcher’s philosophical paradigms
will be defined. Explanations are also provided as to how these philosophical paradigms
shaped this researcher’s approach to the research concern. At the foundation of this
researcher’s approach was a philosophy that informed this researcher’s beliefs, values,
and attitudes toward impression-management and image-threatening events.
Metaphysical presuppositions. Metaphysics is the study of what constitutes the
nature of reality and asks the question, “What is real?” It involves such disciplines as
anthropology, ontology, and cosmology. Theology has an important contribution to make
when addressing questions concerning the nature of persons, being, and nature with
implications for questions of impression management and image-threatening events.

20
At the level of metaphysics, there is a body of truth that all people need to
universally know, namely, the revelation of God to man through the person of Jesus
Christ and the Holy Scriptures. According to Bertrand (2007), the Christian perspective
views reality as that which has been created by God and has been made known to man
through two types of revelation: general and special revelation. General revelation
consists of the knowledge humans acquire through God’s revelation of himself in nature
(Rom. 1:19-20). Special revelation is knowledge revealed by God outside of nature,
specifically in the Bible and in the person and life of Jesus. This researcher understands
that all truth is God’s truth and, as such, must be embraced and considered. The
Scriptures govern all assertions of truth.
Anthropology centers primarily on the nature of persons (Pazmino, 2008). From a
Christian perspective, human beings, made in the image of God, are different from
animals in kind, possess divine worth, and are holistic beings that have the capacity to
reason, relate, make decisions, and emote. Despite the effects of sin, humans are still
made in the image of God and have the potential to grow and develop all aspects of their
humanity. Leadership is charged with valuing those they serve as divine image-bearers
and acting truthfully and authentically before them even in the midst of the worst kind of
human failures. Recognizing this, every impression management tactic carries with it an
implicit anthropology with which it operates that must be examined by the Christian
leader. Followers are not objects that can be used and manipulated for personal or
organizational gain but are fellow image-bearers with legitimate needs and wants.
Ontology asks questions concerning being and life (Pazmino, 2008). This
researcher holds to the view that God’s being is primary. Christian leaders are acting in a
21
godly manner when they emulate the person and character of God. As they lead, they live
out their vocation as ambassadors of Christ, embodying and proclaiming the message of
reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:17-21). This new creation work requires the daily indwelling of
the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Christian leader to fulfill God’s purposes
(Phil. 2:12-13).
Cosmology poses questions concerning the nature of the universe and the world.
The earth and everything in it belongs to the Lord (Ps. 24:1-2). Christian leaders serve as
stewards of creation. When events occur that threaten identities, reputations, and images
of organizations, leaders can respond in ways that reflect a worldview that sees the whole
of the organization (its stakeholders, resources, members, etc.) as God’s possession.
Epistemological presuppositions. Just as one’s metaphysical paradigms
influence one’s stance on axiological questions so do one’s epistemological paradigms.
Epistemology is concerned with the nature of knowing and the various ways of knowing.
Pazmino (2008) suggested that the biblical view of knowledge is holistic, incorporating
physical, affective, and conative aspects of knowing. The physical component involves
being one with the person or thing known. The affective dimension relates knowledge to
human interests or passion. The conative part, the area of the brain responsible for
impulse and action, ties knowledge to the act of love. In other words, when one engages
in a loving relationship with God, one enters into a greater knowledge of God and
develops a greater awareness of God’s knowledge of one’s self.
The New Testament makes it clear that all truth is God’s truth, for God alone is
the source of all knowledge (Col. 2:2-3). A researcher faces the challenge of knowing
how to view truths discovered in various social science literature through the lens of
22
divine revelation. To that end, this researcher recognized that God’s truth governs all
other truth claims. In addressing this tension, Knight (2006) made six epistemological
observations: (1) all truth is God’s truth, which eliminates the secular and sacred
dichotomy; (2) the truth of Christian revelation is true to what actually exists in the
cosmos, so Christians can pursue truth without fear of ultimate contradiction; (3) forces
of evil seek to discredit the Bible, twist human reasoning, and lead persons to rely on
their own understanding in their pursuit of truth; (4) knowing in the biblical sense is
applying the perceived knowledge to practical life; (5) the three-fold sources of
knowledge available to Christians (special revelation, general revelation, and reason) are
complementary and should be used in ways consistent with the biblical pattern; and, (6)
given the unity of truth, the acceptance of a Christian epistemology cannot be separated
from the acceptance of a Christian metaphysics.
Axiological presuppositions. Axiology is the study of values and asks the
question, “What is of value?” It is concerned with ethics and aesthetics, with value
judgments and what one considers good and beautiful (Knight, 2006). These values are
influenced and governed by one’s metaphysical and epistemological views (Pazmino,
2008). These values give birth to leadership goals, methods, and practices.
This researcher believes values are grounded in the person and character of God
not in one’s self or in an external system of rules and standards. For example, lying is
wrong not because the Bible says it is wrong but because God is truth. Because God is
truth, he teaches that lying and deception is wrong. Therefore, an organization’s behavior
in response to crisis must emulate the character of God and be in accordance with God’s
original design. However, because of sin, humans are by nature born self-deceptive, and,
23
left to their own devices, their bent towards sin will naturally lead them to act in crisis for
selfish purposes that are against God’s original design. Therefore, leadership is needed to
help motivate, guide, and discipline those involved in a crisis.
Summary
Humanity’s chief need is to become a redeemed image-bearer, reconciled to God
with a renewed capacity to reflect God’s image in the world. This capacity to reflect
God’s image is threatened when surrounded by the sin inherent to human crises. A
Christian approach to impression management and image-threatening events takes into
account man’s relationship with God and connects all practical efforts to manage
impressions back to the fundamental purpose of man to reflect God’s glory into the
creation and back to God. This approach is influenced by metaphysical, epistemological,
and axiological presuppositions that are governed by a Christian philosophy.
Theological Foundations
It is the view of this researcher that theology also undergirds every framework
through which a practical problem and research problem is viewed and understood. The
following section seeks to embed the problem and related social science research of OIM
strategies used in the wake of an image-threatening event within a theological grid. A
theology of leadership and IM is evidenced in one’s response to image-threatening
events. The response to a crisis reveals one’s propensity for impression management
behavior. This portion of the review includes theological perspectives on light-side and
dark-side leadership.
24
Theological Perspectives of Leadership and IM
Leadership is a mandate given by God to human beings (Gen. 1:26-28). They are
called to “rule” and “subdue.” The biblical record is replete with leaders who used
impression management strategies to gain their right to rule and subdue, maintain their
ruling status, or regain their position. At times these impression management tactics were
used in very calculating and deceptive ways. Other times they seem to have been used
unwittingly. God, on the other hand, leads authentically irrespective of the situation. To
support these claims, this portion of the literature review will draw upon a review and
synthesis of concepts related to IM in the Scriptures in order to develop a theology of
leadership and IM. There are two sides of leadership that emerge: light-side leadership
that promotes truth-telling and transparency and dark-side leadership that promotes
deception and secrecy1. Each side will be explored from a theological perspective.
Light-side leadership. The teaching and life of Jesus stands in stark contrast to the
deceptive behaviors seen in those who use IM tactics to manipulate and deceive. Jesus
called himself the “truth” (John 14:6). There was no deceit found in his mouth (1 Pet.
2:22). He is “the true light who gives light to everyone” (John 1:9). To see Jesus is to see
God the Father (John 14:9), who is the God of truth (Ps. 31:5; Isa. 65:16), is truth (John
3:33; John 7:28; John 8:26; 1 John 5:20), and whose word is truth (John 17:17).
Therefore, he cannot lie (Num. 23:19; Tit. 1:2; Heb. 6:18).
It is no wonder then that Jesus taught his disciples to let their “yes” be “yes” and
their “no” be “no” (Matt. 5:37). He commended Nathanael for being a true Israelite in
1 Although the terms light-side leadership and dark-side leadership have been used by Campbell (2010) to
describe leaders that are focused on others and leaders that are focused on self, this researcher did not
identify in any prior literature the terms being used in the way this researcher defines them.
25
whom there was no deceit (John 1:47) and called his disciples to live free of the need to
perform acts of righteousness to be seen and liked by others (Matt. 6:1).
As followers of Christ, Christian leaders are mandated to walk in the truth (3 John
1:3). They are to believe the truth and love the truth (2 Thess. 2:10-12). Paul calls
Christians to put off falsehood (Eph. 4:25) and speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:32). An
honest answer is compared to a kiss on the lips (Prov. 24:26). God delights in
trustworthiness (Prov. 12:22) and is attentive and responsive to the prayers of those who
keep their lips from deceitful speech (1 Pet. 3:10-12).
Light-side leadership is the type of leadership that has this truth-telling and
transparency at its very core. There is no split between front-stage performance and back-
stage actions. According to Johnson (2012), leaders possessing integrity are “true to
themselves, reflecting consistency between what they say publicly and how they think
and act privately. In other words, they practice what they preach. They are also honest in
their dealings with others” (p. 85). Light-side leadership produces an environment of
trust. Johnson wrote, “Trust encourages teamwork, cooperation, and risk taking. Those
who work in trusting environments are more productive and enjoy better working
relationships” (p. 85).
Dark-side leadership. Jesus taught that anything more than letting your “yes” be
“yes” and your “no” be “no” is from the evil one (Matt. 5:37), whom Jesus called the
“father of liars” (John 8:44). Jesus cautioned his disciples against being like the
hypocrites who managed the impressions others formed of them by praying in public
(Matt. 6:5), making their fasting obvious to others (Matt. 6:14), announcing their
philanthropic acts (Matt. 6:2), wearing unreasonably long robes (Mark 12:38), taking the
26
front seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets (Mark 12:38), and saying
long prayers just for show (Mark 12:40).
Jesus confronted such hypocrites and promised they would receive a harsher
punishment (Mark 12:40). In stating that they wanted to carry out the desires of their
father the Devil, Jesus aligned them with Satan, who does not stand in the truth because
there is no truth in him. Speaking lies is a natural behavior of those who do not stand in
truth (John 8:44). They become practiced in deceit and can easily catch others in their
web of deception. This is precisely the reason for Paul’s encouragement to not be
deceived with empty and meaningless words when confronting a person caught in
immorality (Eph. 5:6).
Jesus also warned his disciples against the deception of false prophets, who give the
impression of being a sheep but inwardly are ravenous wolves (Matt. 7:15). Given the
positive impression that is presented by a false prophet, it is easy for unsuspecting people
to be led astray (Matt. 24:4-5). False prophets may even use godly and miraculous deeds
to cover their ungodly intentions (Matt. 24:24). They masquerade as disciples of Jesus (2
Cor. 11:13), using secrecy (Gal. 2:4; Jude 1:4), tricks (Eph. 4:14), persuasive speech
(Col. 2:4), false promises (2 Pet. 2:19); empty and boastful words (2 Pet. 2:18); smooth
talk (Rom. 16:18); and flattery (Rom. 16:18). Therefore, disciples are to be watchful,
aware, and careful, so they are not deceived and corrupted. (Matt. 7:15; 16:6; 24:4-5;
Mark 12:38-40; Luke 21:8; Acts 20:29-31; Rom. 16:17-18; 1 Cor. 6:9; 15:33; 2 Cor.
11:3; Eph. 4:14; 5:6; Col. 2:4, 8; 2 Tim. 3:5-6; 1 John 3:7). To fall prey to the deception
is to allow the falsehood to spread like gangrene (2 Tim. 2:17-18) and yeast (Matt. 16:6).
27
The actions of the hypocrite can be seen in dark-side leadership. Dark-side
leadership does not have integrity at its core. Rather, there is a split between the front-
stage version of the leader and the back-stage version of the leader. One untrustworthy
act can reveal this split, causing trust to be broken and cynicism to take root and grow.
Johnson (2012) mentioned the common “trust busters” of “inconsistent messages and
behavior, inconsistent rules and procedures, blaming, dishonesty, secrecy and unjust
rewards” (p. 85). He referred to a case in which United Airlines broke the trust of their
employees when they gave unreasonable bonuses to executives while trumpeting the
value of “shared sacrifice” while going through bankruptcy. The stated value of shared
sacrifice was simply an impression the company managed not an actual value rooted in
integrity.
Light-side leadership modeled by the Godhead. God consistently responds to
events that threaten the image of his people and name with truth-telling and transparency.
God does not hesitate to disclose shameful actions even if those actions may reflect
poorly on the integrity of his people. God did not bury a horrific story of sexual abuse,
for its telling revealed the truth about the capacity for evil within the human heart (Judg.
19). If, as Shrivastava and Mitroff (1987) contended, crises are caused by the
simultaneous interaction of failures with the organization and in their environments, then
it follows that a crisis is a product of the Fall not a product of Creation. The Scriptures
demonstrate God’s willingness to describe the full-orbed effects of that failure. The very
fact that God recorded in his Word numerous events in which his people failed suggests
that he is not concerned with covering up ungodly actions for the sake of preserving a
certain appearance. Likewise, organizations or leaders in crisis should not be disbelieving

28
and dismissive when it comes to the capacity for human failure. Because of the Fall, there
is no evil that the human heart is not capable of. A proper anthropology will not render
Christian leaders surprised and off-guard when they are faced with the reality of crisis-
causing situations.
God also demonstrates a willingness to enter into the particulars of evil events.
Leaders who find their images threatened by negative events may seek to protect
themselves by choosing not to enter into the details of the situation (Weick, 1988). In
effect, they are deciding to pretend that certain actions that they would rather not think
about or address do not exist. God, however, faces evil with unflinching courage. He
similarly calls his representative leaders to not be silent about failures that cause human
suffering. Proverbs 31:8-9 exhorts, “Speak up for those who have no voice, for the justice
of all who are dispossessed. Speak up, judge righteously, and defend the cause of the
oppressed and needy” (Holman Christian Standard Bible).2 Perhaps the greatest
demonstration of this willingness to enter into a crisis is the advent of Jesus. God himself
entered into the great sin crisis. Christian leaders are called to be like the Great Servant
(Phil. 2:5).
God demonstrates a concern for the victims of negative events and crises.
Shrivastava (1987) argued that the most profoundly affected stakeholders, the victims,
are ironically sometimes the most easily forgotten because of their powerlessness.
Scriptures teach, however, that the attention of leadership during a crisis is to be focused
on those who are suffering as a result of the crisis. The apostle Paul taught that whenever
a member of the body of Christ suffers, the whole body suffers (1 Cor. 12:26). For this
2 All scripture references throughout the dissertation are from the Holman Christian Standard Bible.
29
reason, the Scriptures instruct believers to have the same concern for others that they
have for themselves (Phil. 2:4). Organizations may fail to follow these instructions when
their focus is on managing impressions instead of ministering to victims.
Though God does not hesitate to speak truth about and enter into the worst kinds
of human failures, he also models how to respond with grace and mercy. The goal of
entering into a negative event is the redemption of individuals involved in the event.
Rather than manage impressions, organizations facing image-threatening events can
choose to embrace truth-telling and transparency, so redemption for the situation itself
and for individuals involved can be achieved.
God is fully aware of the reality that dark-side leaders are often practiced in lies and
deception. Manipulation, deceit, and secrecy are often at the core of an attempt to manage
impressions. This is why Paul instructed the Ephesian believers to be careful when
confronting those caught in immorality (Eph. 5:6). He cautioned against being deceived
by empty words and suggested that deeds done in darkness, those that are shameful to
mention, ought to be exposed and brought to the light (Eph. 5:11). Whenever God
confronted wrongdoing and was responded to with impression management behavior, he
did not accept explanations, excuses, and apologies. If he was to do that, then those in the
wrong would not have been held accountable and would have been likely to contribute
further harm. They would have also learned an impression management script that would
over time become harder and harder to detect.
God also demonstrates light-side leadership by the fair manner in which he treats
all wrongdoers, irrespective of their position or status. The temptation to cover up
negative events using impression management strategies is greater when it involves

30
someone with close family or friendship ties (Marcus & Goodman, 1991). However, no
wrongdoing should be minimized, ignored, or swept under the rug because of the
position, relationship ties, or status of those implicated by the events of the situation.
Summary
When an evangelical organization fails to respond to image-threatening events
with light-side leadership, it chooses to protect evil. It chooses deception over truth-
telling, secrecy over transparency, darkness over light, self-protection over serving
others. Evangelical organizations that choose this path fail to follow after God, who is a
God of truth. When the pulling back of the curtain reveals a back-stage version of the
organization that contradicts the front-stage performance, the tendency might be to
excuse, justify, or ignore what is seen. In doing so, the curtain is allowed to be restored,
and the split remains. That split is harmful to those the organization serves as well as the
organization itself.
Theoretical Foundations
The theory of impression management finds its roots in the fields of sociology and
psychology. Goffman (1959), a sociologist, studied dramaturgical self-presentation
theory and symbolic interactionist theory. He defined impression management as the
process by which an individual attempts to influence, manipulate, or control the
impressions others form of them.
In his book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Goffman (1959) used the
metaphor of an actor on a stage to illustrate how individuals play out their roles to
influence impressions others form of them and to control how people define a given
situation. Innuendos, omissions, ambiguities, and other communication techniques allow

31
the actor to present him or herself in a favorable light. These techniques are often difficult
to identify because they are just shy of outright untruths (Goffman, 1959). Over time,
these techniques are learned, and thus individual “performers” become very adept at
creating false impressions without placing themselves in the “indefensible position of
having told a clear-cut lie” (Goffman, 1959, p. 62). Organizations can also develop such a
performance. Goffman cited mass media as an example of IM behavior at work in
organizations. Through innuendos, omissions, ambiguous statements, nondisclosure,
prevention of discovery, and outright misrepresentation, a media outlet is able to
manipulate the public’s perception of a certain subject, personality, event, or idea.
Objective of IM
The objective of impression management is to control the behavior of the
audience, especially in response to performance, so that the audience defines the situation
in the way that the actor wishes them to define it. The actor influences the definition by
expressing himself in a manner that leads the targets of those communications to
voluntarily act in accordance with the actor’s own plan. There is a reason, or motivation,
behind the impression management strategies. Speaking of the actor’s objective for the
audience, Goffman (1959) wrote,
He may wish them to think highly of him, or to think that he thinks highly of
them, or to perceive how in fact he feels toward them, or to obtain no clear-cut
impression; he may wish to ensure sufficient harmony so that the interaction can
be sustained, or to defraud, get rid of, confuse, mislead, antagonize, or insult
them. (p. 3)
This objective is accomplished through communication. Goffman referred to such
communication as expressiveness and suggested there are two different types of
expressive communication: expressions given through verbal symbols and expressions

32
given off that are intentionally meant to convey a certain message to control others’
perceptions or “inferences” of the actor and the situation (Goffman, 1959, p. 2).
Expressions given typically consist of words used for the sole purpose of conveying
information. Simple verbal statements are examples of expressions given. Expressions
given off consist of a wide range of non-verbal actions that are meant to shape another’s
impressions. For example, one may show up early to work simply to give the impression
that one is an exemplary employee.
Sometimes expressions given and expressions given off can occur in an
asymmetrical way in which the expressions given are meant to deceive and the
expressions given off are meant to feign intent. For example, an individual may give
expressions of remorse over committing a wrong action while intentionally giving off a
look of remorse through facial expressions, tone of voice, and body language. Goffman
suggested it is more difficult for a deceiver to control the expressions given off than it is
to control expressions given. According to Goffman, this might explain the feeling of
being manipulated that one has when being the target of expressions given that do not
match the expressions given off.
As already mentioned, these expressions are sometimes highly calculated and at
other times manifested semi-consciously or even unconsciously. This lack of awareness
may be a result of individuals or organizations operating in accordance with
predetermined roles and expectations. The behavior is not so much a product of one’s
character or personality as it is a product of one’s public role. For example, particular
professions, such as the clergy, demand that individuals conduct themselves in a certain
manner so they do not disgrace their role (Goffman, 1959).

33
Development of OIM Theory
Goffman (1959) posited that projecting and sustaining an organizational image is
accomplished through the cooperation of several individuals. For example, informality
among coworkers (“Mary” and “Bob”) might quickly change to formal relationships
(“Dr. Jones” and “Mr. Smith”) when outsiders are present. He coined the term
performance team to describe the cooperation among two or more performers that work
together to project a certain image. Thus, his work suggested teams engage in “theatrical
performances” of impression management not only for themselves but to present an
image of the organization (Goffman, 1959, p. 77).
Important to organizational impression management is the role an individual within
the organization holds. Organizational actors learn to perform in ways consistent with the
role they have been given. When individuals in an organization cooperate with each other
in an attempt to relay a consistent message and effectively manage a situation, they are
engaging in organizational impression management. Often, the impression management
strategies used by an organization are the same techniques by which everyday individuals
project and sustain their individual image (Goffman, 1959).
Therefore, OIM theory suggests that organizations, as a group of individuals, can
be viewed as manipulative actors who strategically undertake communicative strategies
to influence organizational image (Bolino et al., 2008; Goffman, 1959; Vielhaber &
Waltman, 2008). Organizations can either apply OIM strategies to project and sustain
positive image or to minimize threats to their identity. Goffman’s (1959) theories have
provided a foundation for a rich field of research on impression management. The

34
remainder of this section provides an overview of how OIM research has developed from
Goffman’s theories.
Threats to Organizational Image
Organizations seek to gain and maintain esteem (McDonnell & King, 2013).
Negative events often disrupt that process. Researchers on organizational behavior have
generally referred to negative events as “identity threats” (Elsbach & Kramer, 1996;
Ginzel, Kramer, & Sutton, 1993) because they damage the esteem of the organization. A
common feature of the studies reviewed in this section is that they all investigate whether
and how organizations use impression management when facing identity-threatening
events.
Organizations engaged in impression management can be thought of as
performance teams working together to sustain the image, or definition, of the situation
that its performance presents. To do this, organizations must manage information about
the situation itself. This might include over-communicating some facts and under-
communicating other facts. Often, the facts that are omitted or under-communicated are
those that are considered threatening or disruptive to the image. Goffman labeled this
“disruptive information.” Goffman wrote,
A basic problem for many performances, then, is that of information control; the
audience must not acquire destructive information about the situation that is being
defined for them. In other words, a team must be able to keep its secrets and have
its secrets kept (p. 141).
Organizational secrets. Goffman (1959) identified five types of secrets: dark,
strategic, inside, entrusted, and free. Dark secrets are facts that the team knows and
agrees to conceal because their revelation would disrupt the image that the team is trying
to protect. Strategic secrets are those that include the plans and intentions of the team,
35
which are often kept hidden so as to give the team an upper hand over its audience,
leaving it free to adapt and alter behavior depending on audience response. Inside secrets
include dark and strategic secrets but may also include secrets that would not be
disruptive if leaked to the audience but still give members of the team the feeling of
exclusivity. Entrusted secrets are those that are expected to be kept hidden because the
relationship between members calls for confidentiality. Information shared between a
client and a counselor, for example, might contain entrusted secrets. Lastly, free secrets
are those that somebody outside of the organization knows about the organization and
can release without disrupting his own image. WikiLeaks is an example of an
organization that possesses free secrets. To the organization being exposed, they may be
considered dark or strategic secrets, but to the organization doing the exposing, the
secrets are thought of as “free.”
Since the subject of this research is particularly related closely with dark secrets,
it is helpful to dig deeper into the nature of this type of secret. Goffman (1959) theorized
that there are actually two facts being hidden in relation to dark secrets: first, that such a
kind of secret exists; and, second, the secrets themselves. Dark secrets are powerful
inside secrets because of how disruptive they can be if made public. If members of the
team are able to keep dark secrets inside secrets, then team members grow to trust one
another with such secrets. However, because of the disruptive power of dark secrets, they
are often kept hidden even from other members of the same team. The greater the number
of people in the know, the greater the likelihood of a dark secret getting out, either
intentionally or unintentionally. According to Goffman (1959), organizations concerned

36
with managing the impressions others form of them are very interested in controlling
disruptive information like dark secrets.
Negative reports. Just as disruptive information can threaten an organization’s
image, negative reports about the organization can also challenge organizational identity.
Because a negative report has the potential to influence stakeholder perception of the
organization in focus, those who identify with the organization may use defensive
strategies to mitigate the threat.
For example, Elsbach and Kramer (1996) analyzed how published rankings of
business schools influenced the identity and perceptions of members of those schools.
They collected 554 statements from interview and records data describing reasons for and
responses to the rankings. This analysis produced a preliminary typology of tactics that
members from the schools used in response to the Business Week rankings. The study
revealed how members of the schools included in the rankings found their identity
threatened by the rankings, often responding to that threat by downplaying negative
rankings and highlighting the positive attributes of the school. Members might suggest,
for example, that the school exceeds in areas that the rankings did not consider important.
The Nature of a Crisis
An understanding of the nature of organizational crisis is important to a study on
OIM behavior used in the wake of an image-threatening event. An event that threatens an
organization’s image presents a crisis to that organization. Therefore, a definition of crisis
and an exploration of how organizations generally respond to crisis can provide some
theoretical insights into the use of OIM strategies in the wake of image-threatening
events.
37
Definition of crisis. Hermann (1972) defined crisis as a situation incorporating
three conditions: (a) a threat to high priority goals, (b) a restriction in the amount of time
available for response, and (c) a surprise to decision makers. Reilly (1987) interviewed a
sample of managers and used her findings to suggest that an organizational crisis
manifests the following five attributes: high magnitude, requires immediate attention, an
element of surprise, the need for taking action, and is outside the organization’s control.
Shrivastava and Mitroff (1987) suggested that crises are caused by the
simultaneous interaction of failures within the organization and in their environments.
Failures within the corporation typically fall within three categories: technological
factors, organizational factors, and human factors. These might include gaps in safety
policies, poor organizational structures that lead to miscommunication, and a lack of
judgment when making decisions. When these internal faults intersect with external
failures, small and even routine incidents can morph into crises and even catastrophes.
Marcus and Goodman (1991) proposed a model that categorized crises into one of
three types: accidents, scandals, and product safety and health incidents. Accidents have
identifiable victims, are negative and unfortunate, but allow the organization to
legitimately claim no responsibility since the event was outside of its control. Unlike
accidents, the victims of scandals are less identifiable. The focus tends to be on the
perpetrators since the events are disgraceful and as a result threaten the reputation of the
organization. Responsibility is hard to deny since the events are caused by human
wrongdoing. Product safety and health incidents fall somewhere between accidents and
scandals in terms of ease with which victims can be identified and the culpability of
perpetrators.
38
Although researchers have studied the use of OIM strategies in the wake of a
crisis, many of those studies focused on accidents (Caillouet, 1991; Elsbach, 1994;
Elsbach & Sutton, 1992). The focus of this study will be centered on impression
management strategies used in the wake of an image-threatening event such as a scandal.
Impression management strategies used in the wake of a crisis of scandal seem to be
largely unexplored.
How organizations respond to crisis. Even though a gap exists in the literature
concerning organizational responses to scandals in particular, a review of the research
literature on organizational response to crisis in general reveals the following key
organizational behaviors that are relevant to this study: sensemaking, centralization of
power, and sending optimistic messages.
Sensemaking in crisis. Perhaps the first response organizations have to a negative
event that threatens the image of the organization is to try to make sense of what has
happened or is happening. Individuals within the organization will process the event in
different ways. Therefore, image-threatening events present a sensemaking dilemma for
organizations (Elsbach & Kramer, 1996). This initial confusion often leads to a
worsening crisis.
Maitlis and Sonenshein (2010) analyzed Weick’s (1988) studies on sensemaking
in crisis to show how individuals enact crises as they engage in behaviors that maintain
the norms that provide the soil for a situation in which a crisis can worsen due to poor
management. A recursive process was found that “enacts and re-enacts shared
understandings, as dominant logic shape daily routines, which in turn recreate structures,
39
identities, and expectations that enable and constrain certain collective practices” (p.
557).
For example, impression management behavior in response to an image-
threatening event might be a norm for many leaders within the organization. As the
situation unfolds and the organization attempts to get control of the crisis, these
impression-management behaviors can become compounded over time as small failures
become linked and amplified in a constantly changing environment (Weick, 1993).
Rather than managing the problem, organizations can quickly get caught up in a cycle of
managing images and reputations.
Weick’s (1996) and Maitlis and Sonenshein’s (2010) research on sensemaking in
crisis demonstrated that organizations can avoid entering into this destructive cycle by
placing a focus on wisdom and discernment. Maitlis and Sonenshein applied Weick’s
(1996) research when they suggested that organizations practice two behaviors indicative
of wisdom: updating and doubting. Updating allows organizations to revise
interpretations based on new information. This necessitates the free distribution of
relevant information between all stakeholders and the ongoing collection of new
information. Doubting encourages stakeholders to continually test and revise their
interpretations. When both updating and doubting are working in tandem, wisdom and
discernment are more readily practiced within the organization.
Weick (1996) suggested that wisdom can play a major role in crisis. He wrote,
Ignorance and knowledge grow together . . . In a fluid world, wise people know
that they don’t fully understand what is happening at a given moment, because
what is happening is unique to that time. They avoid extreme confidence and
extreme caution, knowing that either can destroy what organizations need most in
changing times, namely, curiosity, openness, and the ability to sense complex
problems. The overconfident shun curiosity because they think they know what
40
they need to know. The overcautious shun curiosity for fear it will only deepen
their uncertainties. Both the cautious and the confident are close-minded, which
means that neither makes good judgments. In this sense, wisdom, understood as
simultaneous belief and doubt, improves adaptability. (p. 148)
In summary, wisdom and discernment can guard against self-protective impression
management strategies lacking in objectivity.
The opposite of updating and doubting is keeping dark secrets hidden and being
overconfident in one’s ability to manage the situation while at the same time not
disclosing information that is necessary to resolving the crisis because it may be
threatening to one’s image. A commitment to secrecy among a few members of an
organization to keep certain details of a crisis hidden from the rest of the stakeholders has
been shown to create organizational blind spots. These deliberate decisions to keep
certain information a secret kept the organizations from becoming aware that a situation
called for alarm and required urgent action that went beyond the scope of any one
individual’s efforts (Maitlis & Sonenshein, 2010). However, when commitment is
equally given to the whole organization, and the behaviors of updating and doubting are
practiced, then renewal is made more possible even when the decisions made by the team
are the wrong ones.
In summary, organizations that lack sensemaking skills will typically move in one
of two directions: the direction of inaction, as a result of being overcautious, or the
direction of impulsive action, as a result of being overconfident. Organizations that
possess good sensemaking skills learn to balance these reactions. Citing Weick (1998),
Maitlis and Sonenshein (2010) wrote, “There is a delicate tradeoff between dangerous
action which produces understanding and safe inaction which produces confusion” (p.
553).
41
Centralization of power. An organization will typically respond to a crisis with a
centralization of power so that decision making is done within the higher levels of an
organization’s hierarchy (Driskell & Salas 1991; Hermann, 1963; Staw, Sandelands, &
Dutton, 1981). This is partly due to the response of subordinates to look to their superiors
for action during stressful situations. For example, Foushee and Helmreich (1988) found
that subordinate flight-crew members were more hesitant to question the captain under
emergency conditions, sometimes deferring to the extent of not offering valuable
information and feedback.
Staw et al. (1981) observed that during crises, organizational control is increased,
decisions of the more powerful members in the organization will prevail more easily, and
the exercise of influence becomes more centralized. This centralization of decision
making during crisis is an adaptive response that places responsibility in the hands of
those most central to the organization’s values and goals.
This centralization implies that during a crisis, followers will defer more to the
opinions, ideas, and actions of their leaders. At the same time, the leaders will be more
likely to ignore feedback from their followers. In other words, the followers typically
become more subordinate, and the leaders become more superordinate. Hamblin (1958)
found that during group decision making, the leader’s suggestions were more likely to be
adopted by other members of the team during periods of crisis. Crisis tends to strengthen
the hierarchical structure of an organization, such that followers defer more to the leader,
and the leader becomes less responsive to input from followers (Driskell & Salas, 1991).
Driskell & Salas (1991) contended that this phenomenon is most likely a function
of the organization’s hierarchical structure. In other words, the followers are more likely
42
exhibiting status-typed behavior not necessarily a manifestation of non-assertiveness. It is
the organizational structure that contributes to this phenomenon not so much individual
personalities and attributes. Katz (1970) discovered that providing assertiveness training
to team members prior to team interaction did increase their interaction somewhat, but
team leaders reacted with considerable hostility because they felt that team members
were being disrespectful.
An understanding of the theory that organizations will typically respond to a crisis
with a centralization of power is significant to this study because impression management
behavior is directly tied to an attempt to project or preserve a desired image, an image
that is threatened during a crisis and an image that is often shared by those in the highest
levels of the organization’s hierarchy. In other words, this behavior is driven by
individual identities that are tied to organizational identities that are threatened during a
crisis. A threat to the organization’s image is therefore a threat to the images of the
individuals who lead that organization.
Sending overly optimistic messages. Another response that is driven by this same
dynamic is when an organization in crisis acts as if it has the necessary knowledge
needed to resolve the crisis. The existence of strong, positive statements that a situation
looks normal and will likely resolve itself is a common response to crisis. Leaders of the
organization might send overly optimistic messages to its stakeholders to convince them
that the situation is under control. Research has shown that this response is driven by
individual identities that are threatened during crises. In a crisis, “a threatened identity
constrains actions as individuals and teams lose important anchors about themselves”
(Maitlis & Sonenshein, 2010, p. 563). For example, rather than turn to outside help for
43
assistance and advice, organizations can manage the impressions others have of them by
sending messages designed to project the appearance of being capable and self-sufficient.
Weick (1988) observed such phenomena in shift supervisors who acted as if they
had the knowledge to conduct crisis operations but, in reality, possessed little experience
in handling the crisis at hand. As a result, the supervisors exercised authority and made
decisions that came with the role identity of being in charge without the necessary
knowledge to actually be in charge. Such leaders act out of concern for the protection of
their own identity rather than out of concern for the organization and its stakeholders.
Similarly, Kayes (2004) showed how overconfident assertions made by mountain
climbers before an assent kept them from a clear picture of the problem and a solution to
the problem and resulted in the deaths of eight climbers. Weick (1988) and Maitlis and
Sonehnshein (2010) found that strong, optimistic statements and justifications produce
blind spots that keep organizations from seeing contradictory cues and pieces of
evidence. Followers also feel as if they must be bound to those positive outlooks. High-
reliability organizations, on the other hand, instill members with a preoccupation with
failure and encourage them to use vigilant wariness at all times (Maitlis & Sonehnshein,
2010). Landau and Chisholm (1995) argued that pessimism, with the failure-avoidance
management strategy it engenders, is the way to prevent a crisis and suggested that
disappointment be institutionalized to protect against organizational self-deception.
Therefore, an evangelical organization’s belief about its own capacity during a
crisis can be detrimental when the actual experience of handling the crisis is lacking in its
effectiveness. This failure can be attributed both to the organization’s insistence upon
living out its perceived identity and to the stakeholder’s granting of the organization’s
44
implied capacity to act, putting both organizations and stakeholders at fault. Maitlis and
Sonenshein (2010) studied the response of employees during a crisis and found that they
were limited by the structure of authority within the organization. Followers were viewed
as subordinate or inferior, and the leaders were seen as authoritative and knowledgeable.
When followers challenged this strong identity, leaders tended to label followers as
disrespectful and as resistors. Therefore, leaders of organizations not only feel their own
image threatened by an organizational crisis but also feel their image being threatened by
challenges from their followers. In an attempt to preserve their own image while
controlling how followers and other stakeholders define the situation, leaders can
centralize decision-making and at the same time convey overly optimistic messages that
attempt to legitimize the centralization of power. When followers allow this behavior to
go unchallenged, they reinforce such organizational norms.
Summary
In conclusion, the present qualitative study, utilizing content analysis design,
attempted to build off of this theoretical framework by identifying and explaining OIM
strategies used by evangelical organizations in the wake of image-threatening events.
While other organizational sectors are underrepresented in OIM research, the evangelical
sector remains completely devoid of OIM research. Especially intriguing in light of the
theoretical framework provided is the public role that evangelical organizations possess,
making them prone to identity threats and the kind of response to crisis that includes the
dynamics of sensemaking, centralization of decision-making, and sending overly
optimistic messages. Thus, understanding how evangelical organizations use OIM in

45
response to threats to their image might provide theoretical insights, education, and
benchmarking for others in the evangelical community.
Historical Background of OIM
Historically, researchers have focused their investigative efforts on impression
management strategies used at the individual level, seeking to understand how actors
utilize behavioral strategies that affect the impressions made by targets. Impression
management research conducted at the individual level of analysis has addressed such
topics as management and subordinate workplace roles (Bean & Johnstone, 1994; Wood
& Mitchell, 1981), maintaining social relationships (Crant, 1996; Hodgins, Liebeskind, &
Schwartz, 1996; McLaughlin, Cody, & Rosenstein, 1983; Riordan, Marlin, & Kellog,
1983; Roth, Synder, & Pace, 1986; Scher & Darley, 1997; Smith & Whitehead, 1988;
Snyder & Higgins, 1988), and business and customer relationships (Colon & Murray,
1996; Goodwin & Ross, 1992).
A significant study to the development of IM research was that of Jones and
Pittman (1982). They applied individual IM strategies to organizational behavior by
conducting studies in the areas of job interviews, performance reviews, leadership,
organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors, and management
(Bolino & Turnley, 1999; Kacmar et al., 2007; Furner et al., 2010). Their studies laid the
foundation for organizational IM behaviors.
Jones and Pittman (1982) identified five measurable IM behaviors practiced by
individuals in organizational settings. First, ingratiation is the label given to the behaviors
of flattery and compliments intended to manipulate others. Second, self-promotion
involves spotlighting one’s accomplishments and bringing attention to one’s competence.

46
Third, exemplification is the act of going above and beyond to be seen as a role model.
Fourth, intimidation involves bullying or intimidating others in order to gain power over
them. Fifth, supplication involves highlighting one’s difficult circumstance, helplessness,
or incompetence in order to illicit more help, grace, or a reduced workload (Jones &
Pittman, 1982). The Jones-Pittman taxonomy has been widely utilized in research on
individual IM behavior within organizational settings for several decades (Mohamed et
al., 1999).
Since those early studies, far more research has been conducted at the individual
level of IM than at the organizational level of IM, leaving the field of OIM “wide-open”
(Bolino et al. 2008, p. 1098). Just as individual actors evoke IM to influence the
perceptions targets have of them, organizational actors utilize IM to influence the
perceptions stakeholders have of the organization as a whole. These strategies are often
used by CEOs, boards, public relation professionals, and organizational spokespersons.
Because of the amount of research conducted at the individual level of IM,
multiple strategies have been unearthed, and various typologies have been proposed to
categorize those strategies. In contrast, relatively few studies have been conducted on
OIM; therefore, far less strategies have been empirically identified (Bolino et al., 2008).
Evolution from IM to OIM
Although research efforts have focused primarily on IM at the individual level of
analysis, several significant studies have been conducted on IM at the organizational
level of analysis. With support from the theory that organizations can manage
impressions in much the same way that individuals manage impressions, some of the
behaviors exhibited at the individual level were systematically categorized into the Jones
47
and Pittman (1982) taxonomy, which was later revised by other researchers (Chilcutt,
2009). Mohamed et al. (1999) used this taxonomy of individual level IM behavior as a
starting point for the curation of a taxonomy of OIM behavior. Because the OIM
taxonomy developed by Mohamed et al.) is the first of its kind, and the most frequently
referenced among OIM studies (Bolino et al., 2008), it warrants explanation. It must be
noted that neither the individual taxonomy proposed by Jones and Pittman (1982) nor the
organizational taxonomy proposed by Mohamed et al. capture all impression
management tactics. For example, Caillouet (1991) identified condemning the condemner
as an organizational IM behavior, a tactic that is not reflected in the Mohamed et al.
taxonomy.
The work of Mohamed et al. (1999) suggests OIM tactics may be categorized
using a 2 x 2 matrix, as either direct or indirect and as either assertive or defensive. Direct
strategic tactics involve the presentation of information about the organization’s
characteristics, accomplishments, or abilities. In contrast, indirect strategic tactics are
designed to manage information about activities or other entities with which the
organization associates. Assertive strategic tactics are proactive attempts to improve the
organization’s positive image in some specific manner. Assertive tactics have been used
by organizations to present a more positive image through cause-supporting marketing,
fundraisers, advertising, and intimidations (Patelli & Pedrini, 2013). In contrast,
defensive strategic tactics are reactive attempts to manage situations or events that
threaten to harm the image of the organization (Bolino et al., 2008; Mohamed et al.,
1999). Table 1 arranges the OIM tactics in a 2 x 2 matrix.

48
Table 1
Taxonomy of Organizational Impression Management Tactics
Direct Tactics Indirect Tactics
Ingratiation
Boasting
Intimidation
Assertive Tactics Blaring
Organizational promotion
Burnishing
Exemplification
Blasting
Supplication
Accounts
Disclaimers
Burying
Organizational
Defensive Tactics Blurring
handicapping
Boosting
Apologies
Belittling
Restitution
Prosocial behavior
Note. From “A Taxonomy of Organizational Impression Management Tactics,” by A.
Mohamed, W. Gardner, and J. Paolillo, 1999, Advances in Competitiveness Research,
7(1), p. 3.
Direct assertive tactics. Direct assertive tactics at the organizational level include
ingratiation, intimidation, organizational promotion, exemplification, and supplication.
Ingratiation tactics can be other-focused or self-focused. Tactics focused on others use
compliments, flattery, favor rendering, and opinion conformity to enhance their target’s
level of liking. Other-focused tactics can lead to overhelping in which the actor helps a
target achieve a goal, thereby inviting the target and observers to conclude that the target
only succeeded because he or she was helped by the actor (Gilbert & Silvera, 1996).
Ingratiation tactics focused on one’s self utilize statements designed to make the
organization appear more attractive thereby gaining the approval of an audience
(Caillouet, 1991; Mohamed et al., 1999). Political campaigns that compliment or flatter
potential voters, offer favors to donors, speak or behave in ways consistent with the
people they are trying to win to their cause, or make their best characteristics known
49
through advertising and public speeches are utilizing ingratiation tactics. The actor wants
the target to believe that they are both on the same side.
Intimidation tactics are used to threaten or harass targets in order to appear
dangerous and powerful (Bolino et al., 2008). If the actions of others threaten to inflict
harm on the image of the organization, the organization may attempt to send messages
that communicate their willingness and ability to inflict harm on those that pose a threat.
Attempts to condemn, discredit, or defame individuals condemning the organization are
intimidation tactics. Another example of an organization using intimidation tactics is
when it threatens to fire an employee who intends to blow the whistle on unethical
organizational behavior.
Organizational promotion tactics consist of behaviors that present the
organization as being highly competent, effective, and successful. When a church
attributes its increase in attendance to its savvy marketing campaign, it is engaging in
organizational promotion.
Exemplification tactics are utilized by the organization to project images of
“integrity, social responsibility, and moral worthiness” (Mohamed et al., 1999, p. 5). The
organization may seek to be a model of success for other organizations to follow. An
example of exemplification can be seen in Christian universities and colleges that claim
to be a leading example for other schools.
Supplication tactics are employed by the organization to portray an image of
dependency and vulnerability for the purpose of acquiring help, favor, or sympathy from
others. An evangelical non-profit organization may make an appeal to its donors to give
in order to help the non-profit maintain hurting programs. Christian radio stations often
50
run promotional campaigns that call for urgent donations in order to keep the station on-
air.
Direct defensive tactics. Direct defensive tactics at the organizational level
include accounts, disclaimers, organizational handicapping, apologies, restitution, and
prosocial behavior. These tactics are designed to guard organizational image, minimize
negative consequences, or atone for mistakes (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Accounts are explanations of a negative event that seek to minimize the apparent
severity of the negative event. The leadership of a church may downplay the mistakes it
made in resolving a crisis by suggesting that no person was harmed by the events.
Excuses and justifications are two primary OIM tactics given the label accounts in the
research (Bolino et al., 2008). They are defensive statements that attempt to explain away
the negative event in order to escape disapproval.
An excuse is a defensive form of IM used when an organization wants to negate
responsibility for an event (Caillouet, 1991). It seeks to avoid a situation in which
stakeholders view the organization as culpable for a negative event. Like ingratiation,
excuses can take various forms.
First, the organization may evoke denial of intention tactics. Statements are made
that suggest that certain negative events were unforeseeable and, thus, outside of the
organization’s control. An organization, for example, may contend that they did not
intend for a negative consequence to follow a certain organizational decision. The
implication is that it was uninformed of the potential consequence, and thus its decision
was accidental and unintentional. This strategy suggests that the organization would have
made a different decision had it been informed of the potential consequences. The
51
intended result is that the targets of these statements will not view the organization as
responsible for the negative event (Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981).
A second form of excuse is denial of volition. Organizations make statements that
suggest that they could not control nor be expected to control the negative event
(Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981). The implication is that the organization is experiencing the
negative event irrespective of organizational practices or decisions. The intended result is
that the audience will perceive the event as a phenomenon that no organization would
reasonably be expected to take responsibility for.
A third type of excuse is denial of agency. Organizations may argue that they
themselves did not make a particular decision or perform a specific behavior that caused
a negative event. The goal is to lead the stakeholders to believe that they did not produce
the negative event in question (Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981).
When an organization accepts responsibility for the effects of its decisions or
behaviors but does not acknowledge responsibility for negative actions associated with
them, it is employing justification strategies (Caillouet, 1991). The difference between an
excuse and a justification is that whereas an excuse argues that the organization is not
responsible for decisions and behaviors that caused the negative event or consequences, a
justification admits that it is responsible for the decisions and behaviors made but denies
that the event or consequences were negative (Scott & Lyman, 1968). Justification
manifests itself in a variety of forms.
First, organizations may make a denial of injury statement. A claim is made that
no harm has occurred as a result of decisions, behaviors, or events. A second type of
justification is denial of victim, in which organizations argue that no innocent individuals

52
have been negatively affected by decisions or events. If individuals have been harmed by
the negative event, the organization may suggest that such harm was deserving or self-
inflicted. The decisions and behaviors made by the organization were appropriate since
no individual was negatively affected who did not deserve such consequences. Third,
organizations may choose to justify their behavior by condemning the condemner. The
organization acknowledges that a negative event has occurred with negative
consequences but suggests that those who are condemning the organization’s behavior
are not credible, have some ulterior motive, or have caused the negative event. Therefore,
the statements made by the condemner should not be given any weight. Lastly,
organizations may claim that the negative event in question is simply being
misrepresented, misconstrued, or taken out of context. In doing so, the organization
attempts to render the event meaningless (Caillouet, 1991). Defamation is a type of
behavior found within this strategy in which the organization attempts to harm the
reputation of the condemner. 
Disclaimers are explanations given in anticipation of a negative event in order to
ward off any potential future threats to the organization’s image (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Tyler et al., (2012) referred to this strategy as anticipatory or preemptive impression
management as opposed to remedial impression management tactics. Its main purpose is
to justify a future action, decision, or event that will generally be viewed as negative
(Elsbach et al., 1998).
Organizational handicapping consists of efforts by the organization to make
success appear unlikely in order to provide a ready-made excuse for failure. By
suggesting that the organization is handicapped in some way, the organization can then
53
use that perception as an excuse for its failure. A church, for example, may blame a lack
of training, resources, staffing, or congregational support for its mishandling of a crisis
(Mohamed et al., 1999).
When faced with a negative event, some organizations have used apologies. An
apology admits guilt and responsibility and offers or requests an appropriate penalizing
action. Recent research on organizations like Johnson & Johnson, Tylenol, and IBM have
demonstrated the power of an apology to regain the trust of its stakeholders. An apology
may often be followed with restitution. Restitution seeks to compensate the offended,
injured, or harmed (Mohamed et al., 1999).
Prosocial behavior is a direct defensive OIM tactic that highlights the
organization’s involvement in prosocial actions in an attempt to atone for mistakes and
convince stakeholders and/or the public that the organization merits a positive image.
Such claims demonstrate to the public that the organization is committed to socially
acceptable behaviors, beliefs, and values. They are designed to protect the image of the
organization by diluting, rather than refuting, negative claims about the organization
(McDonnell & King, 2013). This tactic does not address claims directly but instead
attempts to divert attention to the perceived positive attributes of the organization. For
example, an evangelical denomination accused of covering up child abuse may attempt to
atone for its mistakes by becoming a vocal advocate for abuse survivors (Mohamed et al.,
1999).
Lastly, although not included in the Mohamed et al. (1999) taxonomy, Caillouet
(1991) identified a direct defensive strategy she labeled negative events misrepresented.
She found statements made by an environmental waste recycling company in response to

54
a crisis that argued that statements offered in regard to a particular event were taken out
of context or were untrue in some way (Caillouet, 1991).
Indirect assertive tactics. Mohamed et al. (1999) also identified indirect
assertive tactics at the organizational level. These tactics have been labeled boasting,
blaring, burnishing, and blasting. Boasting and blaring are tactics that focus on the
organization’s connection to other favorable or unfavorable organizations. Boasting
proclaims a positive link to a favorable organization (a church comparing itself to another
successful church) whereas blaring proclaims a negative link to an unfavorable other (a
church explaining how it is not like another church perceived as unsuccessful).
Burnishing and blasting are tactics that focus on the favorable or unfavorable
characteristics of other organizations. Burnishing enhances the positive features of a
favorable other (a church praising the successes of another church it compares itself to)
whereas blasting exaggerates the negative features of an unfavorable other (a church
overly-criticizing the practices or beliefs of another church perceived as unfavorable).
Indirect defensive tactics. Lastly, Mohamed et al. (1999) identified indirect
defensive tactics at the organizational level. These tactics have been labeled burying,
blurring, boosting, and belittling. Burying and blurring are tactics that focus on the
organization’s connection to other unfavorable and favorable others. Burying obscures,
denies, or conceals the organization’s connection to an unfavorable other whereas
blurring obscures or offers disclaimers for its negative link to a favorable other, often by
way of strategic omissions (Bolino et al., 2008). Boosting and belittling are tactics that
focus on the unfavorable or favorable features of another organization. Boosting
minimizes the negative characteristics of an organization it is positively linked to whereas

55
belittling minimizes the positive characteristics of an organization it is negatively linked
to.
Primary Areas of OIM Research
According to the Bolino et al. (2008) review of IM literature, research that has
been conducted on OIM strategies has focused on five areas. First, some have
investigated how organizations use IM tactics defensively to regain legitimacy in the
wake of controversial or image-threatening events. However, no evangelical
organizations have been researched to date. Second, other research has studied how
organizations use IM tactics assertively to increase acceptance of controversial decisions
or practices. Third, additional studies have examined how organizations use a wide
variety of IM strategies in an attempt to generate a desired image or to accomplish a
specific goal. Fourth, a few studies have examined the role played by the audience in
exchanges involving IM tactics. Fifth and finally, there is limited research on issues like
defamation, whereby organizations use IM in an attempt to damage the reputation of
those perceived as threats.
Since the Bolino et al. (2008) review, there have been a number of studies
conducted on OIM. Graffin, Haleblian, and Kiley (2016) explored the effects of AIM
(anticipatory impression management) in the context of organizational acquisitions. They
found that leaders actively and preemptively seek to offset potentially negative reactions
to the news of an acquisition. Tyler et al. (2012) also studied AIM. Their pair of studies
are the first to empirically demonstrate that using anticipatory OIM strategies can
effectively ward off expected negative reactions. Patelli and Pedrini (2013) studied the
use of optimistic language in CEOs’ letters to shareholders during economic crisis.

56
Mohamed and Gardner (2004) added to the limited research on defamation with their
exploratory study of how organizations attempt to spoil the image of other competing
organizations. Lastly, Ravasi and Schultz (2006) focused on the relationships between
OIM and organizational culture.
This study will focus on OIM strategies used in the wake of controversial or
image-threatening events. Therefore, the following section of the precedent literature
review will describe relevant research that has been conducted within this specific field
of OIM behavior.
OIM in the Wake of Image-Threatening Events
The following section reviews literature that is particularly relevant to the
proposed study. Their relevance is found not only in their contribution to the body of
OIM literature but also in their treatment of specific themes that are significant to this
study. Peer-reviewed studies that are not discussed in this section have explored the use
of OIM in response to faculty strikes (Vielhaber & Waltman, 2008), unethical police-
press relationships (Mawby, 2014), data breaches (Jenkins, Anandarajan, & D’Ovidio,
2014), major environmental accidents (Hooghiemstra, 2000), and press releases that
negatively affect a company’s stock price (Bozzolan, Cho, & Michelon (2015). Other
studies that have been reviewed but not selected for discussion in this section include
several dissertations (Boyer, 2002; Carson, 2013; Hewlin, 2003; Lee, 2014;
Zaharopoulos, 2015).
The Marine Shale Processing Crisis
Caillouet (1991) was one of the first researchers to study OIM strategies used
during a crisis. She conducted an investigation into the impression management strategies
57
used by Marine Shale Processing (MSP), an environmental waste recycling company.
The purpose of her study was to develop a typology of impression management strategies
used by an organization in crisis. She found that ingratiation was the leading strategy,
suggesting that perhaps organizations in crisis are concerned more with bolstering
positive images associated with success than they are with controlling negative images
associated with responsibility for a negative event. She also found that the company
employed different tactics for different audiences, adding further validity to the theory
that organizational actors adapt impression management strategies depending on the
target.
Of the ingratiation strategies, four had been previously suggested in the literature:
other-focused ingratiation, self-enhancing communication, other-enhancing
communication, and opinion conformity. Caillouet (1991) identified two additional
ingratiation strategies and suggested they be incorporated into OIM typologies: role
model and social responsibility. These accounted for almost 20% of the ingratiation
tactics used by MSP. Role model statements are intended to give the impression that the
organization is exemplary and, therefore, set apart from the average organization. Social
responsibility statements suggest to targets that the organization cares about society and
positively contributes to society in some way.
Actions such as excuses and justifications were the second most used strategy
employed by MSP. Statements made to targets suggested that the company recognized
that a negative event may have occurred but that the event was not very significant. MSP
also frequently employed the strategies of “condemning the condemner” and “negative
events misrepresented.” Condemning the condemner simply argues that another person or
58
group who is shining a light on the problem is in fact at fault for the problem. The goal of
these statements is to discredit the condemner. Negative events misrepresented suggests
that an event is taken out of context or makes untrue statements about the details of the
event. These two strategies accounted for 20% of all strategies used.
Another important discovery made by Caillouet (1991) was the existence of
various strategies used for various targets, suggesting that MSP adapted its tactics
depending on its audience. The typology proposed by Caillouet includes the following
strategies: excuse, justification, intimidation, ingratiation, role model, social
responsibility, condemnation of the condemner, negative events misrepresented, and
condemnation of the organization.
The Elsbach Studies
Elsbach and her colleagues conducted a few studies in the 1990s that focused on
how organizations use defensive IM strategies in response to negative events that threaten
their image (Elsbach et al., 1998). They examined the process by which organizations use
IM strategies to regain legitimacy. For example, Elsbach and Sutton (1992) found that
organizations could divert attention away from negative images of the organization by
giving accounts that focused on the ways in which the organization was advancing
societal goals. This is similar to the social responsibility strategy identified by Caillouet
(1991). They researched two organizations, Earth First! and the AIDS Coalition to
Unleash Power (ACT UP), and how they each sought to regain legitimacy in the eyes of
its stakeholders after both organizations faced four negative events. Out of their
investigation emerged a five-step process model for how organizations regain legitimacy:
59
1. Illegitimate action is conducted by an organization’s members that attracts
attention to the organization.
2. The organization chooses to either conform with the illegitimate action or
decouple themselves from it.
3. Justifications and defenses of innocence strategies are utilized to reduce the
negativity of the event and the organization.
4. Enhancements and entitling strategies are utilized to improve the positivity of
the event and the organization.
5. The organization receives endorsement and support from stakeholders.
Step two requires the organization choose one of two courses of action: conform
the organization to the illegitimate action or decouple the organization from the
illegitimate action. According to Elsbach and Sutton (1992), “institutional conformity
involves displaying visible organizational structures and practices that are isomorphic
with those of legitimate organizations in an institutional environment. This conformity
implies that the organization and its spokespersons are credible, rational, and legitimate”
(pp. 709-710). Decoupling, on the other hand, involves actions taken to separate the
organization as a whole from the illegitimate actions of individual members. Step two is
important to an understanding of OIM as it sets the stage for the impression management
strategies used in step three.
Elsbach and Sutton (1992) identified two primary defensive IM strategies used at
this stage in the process: defenses of innocence and justifications. Defenses of innocence
are claims that one is not responsible for an event or that the event did not occur
(Schlenker, 1980 as cited in Elsbach & Sutton, 1992). Justifications are claims that the
60
event was not negative because of the positive consequences of the event or because the
circumstances that surrounded the event were so uncontrollable that no wrongdoing can
be reasonably attributed to the organization.
An example of a defense of innocence tactic, usually following or accompanied
with decoupling, is when an organization claims that it did not endorse or was not aware
of the illegitimate action and thus is not responsible. Elsbach and Sutton (1992) identified
an example of justification when the organization ACT UP defended members of its
organizations for disrupting a church service at St. Patrick’s Cathedral on December 17,
1989, by claiming that the protest was necessary because peaceful negations with church
officials had not produced satisfactory changes in their policy toward safe sex and AIDS.
According to Elsbach and Sutton (1992), the goal of these two impression
management strategies is to divert attention away from the negative aspects of the event
and toward the positive aspects of the event. The intended outcome is that targets will
view the organization as responsible. If that outcome is achieved, the organization can
then move toward the fourth step: enhancements and entitlements. Enhancements go
beyond defending the event to actually promoting the perceived merit of the event. The
event, once considered negative, is now viewed in a positive light. If that is achieved, the
organization then attempts to receive credit, or entitlements, for the events. It is at this
point, step five, when organizational legitimacy is regained and then strengthened
through new or renewed endorsements from its stakeholders.
The research by Elsbach and Sutton (1992) is important to OIM strategies used in
crisis because it places OIM within the context of an overall process used by an
organization to retain or regain legitimacy. Impression management, therefore, is not a

61
stand-alone phenomenon. It is generated by prior motives and choices and is intended to
produce specific desired outcomes.
Elsbach (1994), recognizing that OIM was a “recent but growing paradigm” (p.
84), contributed to the field with a study on how the cattle industry used verbal
acknowledgments and verbal denials (called accounts) to regain legitimacy following
eight negative or controversial events (e.g., cutting down oak trees, cattle grazing in a
state park, animal cruelty allegations).
Acknowledgments were forms of accounts that argued, “we recognize a negative
event occurred, but . . .,” “it wasn’t our fault,” “we had a good reason for our actions,” or
“the ultimate outcome was positive” (p. 65). An example found in this particular study is
when the cattle industry defended its use of hormones by claiming, “the benefit of
hormones is that the animal’s healthier, and you get a leaner product” (p. 65). Such
claims minimize the negative aspects of the events by diverting attention to positive
aspects.
Denials were forms of accounts that proposed “we weren’t involved” or “it didn’t
happen.” Statements like these are intended to create distance between the organization
and the events themselves or the individuals responsible for the events so as to cast the
organization in an innocent light. Examples cited by Elsbach (1994) include Beef
Queen’s claim that it “hadn’t done anything wrong” in chopping down over 100 historic
trees on its land, Association X’s claim that “there is no evidence of any human health
problems from the use of hormones,” and Cattle King’s claim that “we don’t have a food
safety problem” in reaction to an audit revealing unsanitary practices at meat-packing
plants.
62
Another significant contribution made by Elsbach’s (1994) research is the
different types of content contained in these accounts. She discovered four different
contents: references to normative practices, references to rational practices, comparison
with industry practices, and references to historical practices. She further categorized
these types into two main categories: references to institutional practices and references
to technical practices. For example, a church may defend its response to an image-
threatening event by suggesting that its practices are similar to other churches or in
keeping with the way it has always responded to such incidents. It may also refer to
technical practices, suggesting that its response was logical or governed by common
procedures. Similar to the findings made by Caillouet (1991), Elsbach also discovered
that accounts and content varied depending on the target, adding even further weight to
the theory that actors engaged in impression management alternate scripts based on the
targets receiving the accounts.
The Findings of Marcus and Goodman
Marcus and Goodman (1991) found that defensive announcements made in the
wake of an image-threatening event can help an organization restore its image of
legitimacy. They argue that accounts given during a crisis can have profound impacts on
both the members of the organization and the victims of the crisis. Unfortunately,
apologies are only given on rare occasions. In the majority of crisis situations,
organizational leaders consistently deny wrongdoing, even in the face of overwhelming
evidence to the contrary (Marcus & Goodman, 1991).
A company’s management can respond to a crisis with apologies and denials. It
can announce changes in policies, procedures, or personnel. It can choose to be more

63
transparent and open channels of communication, or it can choose to close channels of
communication. According to Marcus and Goodman (1991), certain cultures (e.g. the
Japanese) expect the chief executive to resign after a major crisis.
Marcus and Goodman (1991) analyzed announcements made by organizations in
response to three different types of crises: accidents, scandals, and product safety and
health incidents. The result of their study found that accommodative announcements were
better received by shareholders after a scandal than were defensive announcements. They
suggested organizations follow their conscience and adhere to moral principles even if
doing so might not be in the best interest of the organization. They wrote,
We disagree with the following statement by Lee Iacocca: “Confession is good

for the soul, and when you offend someone, even unintentionally, it feels good to
say, ‘I’m sorry.’ But when there’s a chance that you might end up in court, you’d
better think twice.” (p. 301)
Excuses, justifications, and apologies all admit fault. For organizations, an
admission following a crisis or conflict would probably do little to harm their legitimacy
and might even convey an image of honesty and trustworthiness (Allen & Caillouet,
1994). However, leaders operating in a public light might find an admission to be fatal or
fear admissions would be used against them. This leads to a strong motivation to deny
responsibility (Marcus & Goodman, 1991).
Marcus and Goodman (1991) also discovered that impression management
strategies are difficult to pinpoint because different strategies are directed toward
different individuals in response to the same event, so a leader can achieve his goals for
various relationships. They found that during a crisis due to leadership failure, leaders
were forced with choosing to use accommodative strategies benefiting those hurt by the
failures (such as apologies) or defensive strategies benefiting those they perceived as

64
holding power (such as excuses). Their choice to benefit the more powerful individual
was consistent with a major institutional norm: serving the interests of those in power is a
primary goal of leaders.
The Findings of McDonnell and King
McDonnell and King (2013) explored how organizations responding to consumer
boycotts used prosocial claims to defend their public image. The researchers
hypothesized that an organization can dilute the negative media attention from a
consumer boycott by focusing on its commitments to socially acceptable values and
behaviors. They studied a sample of 221 boycotts announced between 1990 and 2005.
The findings of their study suggest that organizations significantly increase their
prosocial statements following a boycott. Bozzolan et al. (2013) made a similar finding in
their study of impression management strategies used by FIAT in response to negative
press releases. Whenever the sentiment of the local press toward FIAT was low, FIAT
seemed to put in place counteractive measures by increasing the optimism of its press
releases.
McDonnell and King (2013) also found that organizations react with a larger
increase in the impression management tactic of prosocial claims when the threat is
larger. Further, they discovered that the higher the reputation of an organization is, the
more they will rely on impression management strategies.
These findings led McDonnell and King (2013) to propose two important
mechanisms: threat amplification and buffering. Threat amplification suggests that the
greater the threat, the greater the impression management. According to the researchers,
organizations “that enjoy a higher position in their field have more to lose when that
65
position is threatened” (p. 392). Therefore, organizations with higher reputations tend to
act with more urgency. Buffering happens when an organization has successfully
managed threats in the past by using impression management tactics and is therefore less
threatened by future negative events. When an organization faces a threat to its image, it
is likely to draw upon its past arsenal of impression management tactics to respond
defensively to that threat. The organization has then successfully created a buffer
between its image and any future threats to its image.
Another important contribution made by McDonnell and King (2013) is a
conceptual model of the likelihood of post-threat impression management. They posited
that organizations “are primarily motivated to engage in impression management by the
external threat to their position in a field” (p. 395). The strength of the threat and the
strength of the organization’s reputation will influence the likelihood of the use of
impression management tactics by the organization.
In summary, the research conducted by McDonnell and King (2013) yielded some
important implications for this study. First, because organizations with high reputational
standing have the most to lose, they are the most vulnerable to image-threatening events.
Second, that threat to the organization’s image is the primary motivating factor in the use
of impression management strategies. Third, organizations tend to use the same kind of
impression management tactics that they have used in the past, “drawing upon their
performance repertoire for routinized responses to threats” (p. 410). Lastly, organizations
that have successfully managed their image in response to past threats effectively create a
buffer between their image and future threats to that image.

66
Biblical Foundations of Leadership and IM
Leadership is a process by which an individual influences a group of individuals
to accomplish a common goal (Northouse, 2012). This process of leading others can
include attempts to influence the impressions others have of the leader. If IM strategies
are included in the leadership process and if impressions followers form of the leader are
important to the process, then such a dynamic warrants a biblical perspective on
leadership in relation to impression management.
First, a narrative of impression management is given, starting with the first
instance of IM in the Garden of Eden. By describing IM and OIM behaviors found
recorded in the Bible, this researcher demonstrates that certain themes related to IM
emerge from the biblical text. Second, a theology of light-side and dark-side leadership is
developed. Much of this portion involves a discussion about the nature and behavior of
God, who is truth and never gives false impressions.
Although the term impression management is not explicitly used in the Bible, the
tactics and behavioral patterns that inform the concept of impression management are
visible. One result of social science research on IM is the creation of names and
definitions for specific tactics and sub-tactics. These names and definitions can be
appropriately applied to examples of IM behavior in the Bible as long as the application
of the names and definitions is consistent across behaviors of the same classification. The
following section, while not exhaustive, provides numerous examples of IM tactics as
defined in social science research.

67
Biblical Narrative of IM and OIM
The following section highlights impression management behavior found among
individuals and organizations recorded in the Scriptures. Individuals that teamed together
in the Scriptures for the sake of managing impressions are considered organizations in
this study. The purpose of this exploration was to identify any emerging themes
concerning leadership and impression management. The themes are listed and described
at the conclusion of this section and informed this researcher’s biblical perspective on
leadership and impression management.
Origin of IM. The first instance of impression management behavior recorded in
the Bible is found in the Serpent’s conversation with Eve in the Garden of Eden. The
conversation began with a question being posed to Eve by the Serpent in which the
Serpent questioned if God really said that Adam and Eve could not eat from any of the
trees in the garden (Gen. 3:2). The strategy is clear: to misrepresent a perceived negative
event so as to draw attention to its perceived negative components. It is a calculating
maneuver that is difficult to recognize because it falls short of being an outright lie.
When Eve corrected the statement, thereby not falling for the trick by adopting the
impression given by the Serpent, the Serpent changed the script. His next strategy was
ingratiation. He told an outright lie concerning their death and presented a positive,
flattering image of a future Eve, an Eve that is like God, knowing both good and evil
(Gen. 3:4-5). At this point, Eve became convinced, and the goal of the Serpent was
achieved (Gen. 3:6).
It was at this moment that Adam and Even became impression managers
themselves. Before this encounter, they were naked and unashamed (Gen. 2:25). They
68
felt no need to cover themselves. After their sin, their eyes were opened, and they
suddenly felt shame at their nakedness (Gen. 2:7). They dealt with this shame by
covering themselves with fig leaves. They became concerned with their nakedness and
worked to cover it up when they should have been concerned with their sin and being
made right with God.
IM passed down through the first generations. Rather than pursuing
transparency and truth through confession, Adam and Eve chose to pursue an impression
of innocence. This pursuit continued even after they were confronted by God (Gen. 3:8-
11). God found them in hiding, exposed their sin, and gave them a chance to respond.
Instead of apologizing, Adam employed the tactic of blaming, a form of justification that
makes another look bad (Gen. 3:12). Justification is a form of defensive IM that accepts
responsibility for a negative event but not the negative implications, that is, there is an
external cause for the action. In this case, the cause was Eve. Eve responded in similar
fashion, only she blamed the Serpent (Gen. 3:13).
God did not address the impression management behavior. Rather, he moved
directly to consequences, suggesting that God sees through such strategies and cannot be
deceived by them (Gen 3:14-19). While Adam and Eve saw a justification for their
actions, thereby freeing them of the responsibility for negative implications, God did not
see any plausible justifications.
These strategies were passed down to their children. After Cain attacked his brother
Abel and killed him, God confronted Cain by inquiring of the whereabouts of his brother.
Cain responded, “I don’t know. Am I my brother’s guardian?” (Gen. 4:9). Such a
response is identified in the IM literature as a form of excuse called denial of volition,

69
where the actor argues that he could neither control nor be expected to control the event
in question (Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981). Once again, God did not confront the IM behavior
but instead spoke directly to the truth of the event and presented consequences for the
wrongdoing (Gen. 4:10-12). Cain responded to the pronounced consequences with a
different type of impression management strategy called supplication, suggesting that an
impression management script had been learned. Supplication is a form of assertive IM
that attempts to obtain help or escape punishment by portraying one’s self as weak,
helpless, and dependent (Bolino et al., 2008).
Lamech, a sixth-generation descendant of Cain, referred back to the curse of Cain
in his poetic presentation of himself (Gen. 4:23-24). He depicted himself as a strong
warrior able to avenge himself absolutely and without mercy. Such an impression can be
a result of intimidation, an assertive IM tactic that threatens in an attempt to appear
dangerous and powerful (Bolino et al., 2008). This is a more direct and assertive form of
IM than any other tactic observed in the Biblical narrative up to this point.
Abraham’s use of IM. Abraham’s use of IM behavior began with an attempt he
made to conceal the true identity of his wife Sarai on a trip to Egypt (Gen. 12:10-20). He
was concerned the Egyptians would see how beautiful Sarai was, kill him, and kidnap
her. He devised a false narrative that gave the Egyptians the impression that Sarai was his
sister. He believed this perception would not only spare his life but result in good
treatment. When Pharaoh learned of this deception, he confronted Abraham and had him
and Sarai escorted out of Egypt.
Throughout Abraham’s life one finds a growing pattern of deception in himself and
in those close to him. In a land conflict with his son-in-law Lot, Abraham uses the IM
70
tactic opinion conformity to resolve the conflict, suggesting that their blood relationship
should not allow for conflict (Gen:13:8). When Abraham convinced his wife to pose as
his sister, he used a form of IM called favor-rendering, seen in his statement, “Do me a
favor” (Gen. 20:13). When a defeated enemy king, Sodom, requested that his people be
returned but not their possessions, Abraham refused to keep the possessions because he
believed Sodom would later take credit for Abraham’s wealth (Gen. 14:23). He faced
blame from his wife Sarai (Gen. 16:5) who later tried to deceive God when asked about
her response to the news that she would give birth at an old age.
When he and Sarai found themselves foreigners again in the land of Gerar, they
tried to trick King Abimelech by presenting Sarai as Abraham’s sister. When Abraham
was confronted by King Abimelech, he explained his actions by suggesting that he was
protecting himself and his wife from harm. This is a tactic similar to what the IM
literature calls blurring, in which actors blur their connection with others by way of
strategic omissions (Bolino et al., 2008). It is not without reason then that King
Abimelech allowed Abraham to stay in the land on the condition that he promise not to
ever again deceive him or his descendants.
Isaac and Jacob’s use of IM. Isaac was caught in the same deception with King
Abimilech as his father was: giving the impression that his wife was actually his sister.
He used a form of self-focused IM called blurring, hence Abimilech’s exclamation, “She
is obviously your wife! Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’?” (Gen. 26:9). Isaac’s
attempt to blur the true nature of his relationship with Rebekah was a self-protective IM
tactic, revealed in his response to Abimilech: “Because I was afraid someone would kill
me to get her from me” (Gen. 27:9).

71
Through a case of identity theft, Isaac was tricked by his own son Jacob into giving
him the birthright. Jacob successfully gave the impression that he was his brother Esau,
wrongfully securing the birthright that was supposed to be given to Esau (Gen. 27:24).
Throughout the biblical record concerning Jacob, one finds numerous examples of IM
behavior. He was prone to favor rendering, a form of ingratiation in which the actor helps
others and does favors for them in order to appear likable, obtain return favors, or gain
loyalty. He rendered favors in his quest to marry Rachel (Gen. 29:18, 26), in his attempt
to appease his brother Esau (Gen. 32:20), in his relationship with his sons (Gen. 37:3),
and in his request to be buried with his ancestors (Gen. 29:29). Later in life, he also
employed supplication, another form of assertive IM (Gen. 42:36, 38; 43:6, 9).
Moses’ and Aaron’s use of IM. When God spoke to Moses through the burning
bush and called him to return to Egypt to lead the Israelites out of bondage, Moses
responded by broadcasting his limitations in order to escape the assignment being given
to him. Utilizing a form of self-handicapping IM, Moses suggested that he lacked
eloquence and was hesitant in speech (Ex. 4:10). God became angry with this response
and promised to provide Aaron, the brother of Moses, as a spokesperson (Ex. 4:14-16).
After the first confrontation between Moses and Pharoah failed to lead to the Israelite’s
freedom, Moses again suggested to God that Pharoah would not listen to Moses because
of his poor speech (Ex. 6:12, 30).
When Moses confronted Aaron for allowing the people to worship a golden calf,
Aaron blamed the people for being intent on evil and asking him to make a god (Ex.
32:22-24). In reality, Aaron had allowed the people to get out of control (Ex. 32:25). The
account he gave for the situation was a form of excuse. He confirmed a lack of control
72
but shifted the blame to the situation. Later, Aaron and Miriam criticized Moses for
marrying a Cushite woman. They announced to the people, “Does the Lord speak only
through Moses? Does He not also speak through us?” (Num. 12:2). There are two
strategies at work in this statement. The first question is designed to downplay the
positive attributes of Moses and is an indirect defensive IM tactic called belittling. The
second question is designed to enhance the positive images of Aaron and Miriam and is a
self-focused form of assertive IM called self-promotion.
Saul’s use of IM. 1 Samuel 15 records the pivotal interaction between Saul and
Samuel after Saul failed to follow the Lord’s command in not completely destroying the
Amalekites and everything they possessed (1 Sam. 15:3). One finds as many as six IM
strategies at work in Saul, all used interchangeably. First, he used the direct assertive
strategy of self-promotion seen in his building of a monument to himself (1 Sam. 15:12)
and in his self-proclaimed success: “I have carried out the Lord’s instructions” (1 Sam.
15:13). Second, when pressed to give a true account, Saul blamed the troops, a form of
excuse. Third, he used a form of direct defensive IM akin to prosocial behavior wherein
he diverted attention away from the negativity of the event by highlighting the perceived
positive outcomes, namely, that the best livestock were spared in order to sacrifice them
to the “Lord your God” (1 Sam. 15:15). The attention Saul brought to sacrifices made to
the “Lord your God” may also have been an attempt at opinion conformity. Fourth, by
stating that they had destroyed the rest, Saul used organizational promotion tactics to
present the appearance of success and dilute the events that gave the appearance of
failure.
73
Samuel remonstrated Saul then proceeded to tell Saul what the Lord had spoken to
Samuel the night before (1 Sam. 15:16-19). Saul was defensive once again and used self-
promotion tactics in which he highlighted the perceived successes of his work (1 Sam.
15: 20-21). Finally, after hearing words of rejection (1 Sam. 15:23), Saul broke down and
admitted responsibility, only to immediately justify his actions by suggesting that he
acted out of fear of the people and was obeying them. It is a form of self-handicapping, in
which Saul contended that his fear of the people handicapped him from obeying God. His
motive is clear: to immediately be brought back into God’s acceptance of him as king (1
Sam. 15:25).
Saul attempted to use the ingratiation strategy of favor rendering with David when
he offered to give his eldest daughter to David as his wife in exchange for David’s
commitment to fight in battle (1 Sam. 17:17). Saul was feeling increasingly threatened by
David’s successes and perhaps thought that David might die in battle.
David’s use of IM. David became king of Israel at the age of 30 (2 Sam. 5:4),
experienced numerous successes early in his reign, and quickly developed a reputation
for himself (2 Sam. 8:13). A threat to this positive image came in the form of adultery
and murder. Bathsheba was married to Uriah the Hittite, one of David’s elite warriors,
and was therefore off-limits to the king. David crossed that line then arranged to have
Uriah killed in battle (2 Sam. 11). When confronted by the prophet Nathan, David
apologized and accepted the penalty for his sins (2 Sam. 12).
The significance of this event in relation to IM is the connection between David’s
sterling reputation and his willingness to be honest and truthful in response to a serious
threat to that image. First, in the majority of crisis situations, organizational leaders
74
consistently deny wrongdoing, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary
(Marcus and Goodman, 1991). Second, studies have shown that those who occupy more
of the public eye are even more inclined to use impression management tactics to protect
their images. Third, those same studies found that impression management tactics
increase when the threat is larger (McDonnell and King, 2013). Given the height of
David’s reputation, the elephantine threat of adultery and murder to that reputation, and
the recalcitrance of most individuals when confronted, it is remarkable that David
responded with such transparency.
Ahab’s use of IM. God instructed the prophet Elijah to confront evil King Ahab
during the third year of a severe drought and famine that had struck the land of Israel.
When Ahab met Elijah, who had been evading Ahab’s attempts to capture and kill him,
he accused Elijah of being the “destroyer of Israel” (1 Kings 18:17). Such a statement
reveals a direct assertive strategy of defamation used for the purpose of maximizing the
perceived negative characteristics of another (Bolino et al., 2008). Elijah was not, in fact,
the destroyer of Israel as he stated in his response to Ahab (1 Kings 18:18). When Jezebel
received word of what transpired at Mount Carmel, she used intimidation, a form of
direct assertive IM intended to convey an ability to inflict harm when she threatened to
end his life within a day (1 Kings 19:2).
Herod’s use of IM. When Herod secretly summoned the wise men and asked them
the exact time the star of Bethlehem appeared, he gave the wise men the impression that
he was also interested in visiting Jesus in order to worship Him. One can argue that there
are two strategies employed by Herod. First, a tactic similar to opinion conformity is used
to suggest that he shares the same beliefs towards Jesus as the wise men. Second, stating
75
that he would like to visit and worship Jesus is akin to the IM tactic of prosocial behavior.
It is also worth noting that the meeting was called in secret. Secrecy is a common
characteristic of IM behavior (Goffman, 1959).
The nation of Israel’s use of OIM. When Israel demanded a king, they argued that
other nations had a king and that they needed to be like those nations (1 Sam. 8:5, 19-20).
This could be a form of burnishing, an indirect assertive IM tactic that enhances the
positive features of a favorable other. Omitted is the reality that God had called Israel to
be distinct from the nations (Lev. 20:26; Deut. 4:6-8).
The prophets of Ahab’s use of OIM. The prophets that served King Ahab worked
together to present to Ahab a false image of future success in battle. When Micaiah, a
true prophet, was called to prophesy, he committed himself to speak the truth despite
pressure from the prophets to conform to the favorable words they were speaking to the
king (1 Kings 22:13). The prophets, who had all received a lying spirit (1 Kings 22:22),
teamed together to present a favorable impression to the king. Their blandishments were
a form of the OIM tactic of ingratiation. In juxtaposition to their approach, Micaiah
stated, “As the Lord lives, I will say whatever the Lord says to me” (1 Kings 22:14).
The research of Maitlis and Sonenshein (2010) found that leaders of an
organization tend to communicate overly optimistic messages to convince others that a
situation is not as bad as it seems. Their research suggested that this response is driven by
individual identities that are threatened during crises. They wrote, “A threatened identity
constrains actions as individuals and teams lose important anchors about themselves” (p.
563). King Ahab chose to listen to the overly optimistic prophecies, perhaps because they
appealed to his heightened view of self, and it resulted in his death in battle.
76
The nation of Assyria’s use of OIM. During the reign of Hezekiah, Assyria sent a
diplomatic spokesperson, Rabshakeh, to speak to the Israelites on behalf of Sennacherib,
the king of Assyria. Rabshakeh’s speech was filled with impression management tactics.
First, he used the indirect, other-focused tactic of blasting to exaggerate the unfavorable
characteristics of Egypt in an attempt to convince the Israelites they could not rely on
Egypt for protection (2 Kings 18:19-22). He followed that tactic with boasting, an
indirect tactic that focused on his connection with the king of Assyria and exaggerated
the positive characteristics of Sennacherib and his nation (2 Kings 18:23-25). The same
tactics were then repeated: Hezekiah was blasted as a deceptive king that did not possess
the ability to bring deliverance, and Sennacherib was boasted in as a king who offered
peace, prosperity, and life (2 Kings 28-32). Finally, Rabshakeh’s belittled the God of the
Israelites, an IM tactic that seeks to minimize the positive characteristics of another,
when he suggested that God cannot deliver Jerusalem from the power of the Assyrians (2
Kings 18: 33-35). Taken together, these strategies comprise an organizational-level
attempt by the Assyrians to use deception to redefine the situation for the purpose of
managing the impressions the Israelites had of Egypt, Hezekiah, Sennacherib, Assyria,
and God.
Interestingly, the people were instructed not to respond to Rabshakeh (2 Kings
18:36). Instead, Hezekiah went to God in prayer and requested deliverance (2 Kings
19:14-19). God responded by sending the angel of the Lord to kill 185,000 men in the
camp of the Assyrians (2 Kings 19:35). Sometime after, Sennacherib was killed by his
own sons (2 Kings 19:37).

77
Ezra’s opponents’ use of OIM. When the Israelites were allowed by Cyrus to
return from exile to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple, certain opponents of the work who
resided in Jerusalem, led by a high-ranking official named Rehum, wrote a letter to King
Artaxerxes. In that letter, the authors used misrepresentations of negative events and
hyperbolic language called blasting to maximize the bad characteristics of the work and
give the king the impression that the finished work would result in him losing all
possession of the land west of the Euphrates (Ezra 4:9-16). Multiple OIM tactics were
used to exaggerate the threat of the work and its effects on Artaxerxes.
The Israelites faced an organizational crisis when it was reported to Ezra that the
men of Israel had taken foreign women as wives and that the high-ranking officials had
taken the lead in committing these unfaithful acts (Ezra 9:1-3). Rather than defend the
leaders, or make an attempt to redefine the situation, Ezra responded with public
confession and repentance (Ezra 10:1). He then led an investigation into the matter, dealt
with all the men who had married foreign women, sent away all the foreign wives and
their children, and recorded a list of offenders (Ezra 10:5-44).
Nehemiah’s opponents’ use of OIM. Nehemiah faced stiff opposition to the
rebuilding of the Jerusalem wall. Sanballat and Tobiah teamed together to stop the work.
They defamed and belittled the Jews (Neh. 4:2-3) and misrepresented the work, which
they perceived as negative, in order to discredit it (Neh. 4:3). When work progressed,
Sanballat and Tobiah plotted with the Arabs, Ammonites, and Ashdodites to devise a way
to throw Jerusalem into confusion (Neh. 4:7-8).
They then sought to meet with Nehemiah, giving the impression they were
intending no harm. However, when Nehemiah refused to meet, they resorted to

78
intimidation and outright lies. They invented false narratives that suggested Nehemiah
was planning a mutiny against the king and threatened to report him to the king (Neh.
5:8-9). Finally, they attempted to discredit Nehemiah’s reputation by hiring a man to lure
Nehemiah into entering the temple to escape a supposed plot against his life. Had
Nehemiah entered the temple to protect his life, he would have sinned (Neh. 5:11-12).
Judas’ use of IM. Jesus was betrayed with perhaps the clearest use of IM in all of
the Bible. Judas, who had pitted himself against Jesus as his enemy and whom Satan had
entered, approached Jesus with a friendly greeting and kissed him (Matthew 26:49). The
IM tactic of ingratiation was used to give the impression of liking and good intentions
though the true intent was one of hate and evil.
Peter’s use of IM. After Jesus was arrested, Peter decoupled himself from him, a
behavior that Elsbach and Sutton (1992) identified in leaders who distance themselves
from others who are viewed in a negative light. The attention that Jesus’ arrest attracted
forced his disciples to choose whether they would align themselves with Jesus or
decouple themselves from him. Peter literally distanced himself from Jesus (Matt 26:58).
This action was important as it set the stage for the impression management strategies
that would be used later.
According to Elsbach and Sutton (1992), justifications and defenses of innocence
are strategies commonly used by those who choose to decouple themselves from those
who are perceived in a negative light. When pressed three times to give an account of his
relationship with Jesus, Peter used the indirect defensive strategy of burying in order to
give the impression of innocence.

79
Summary
There are a few biblical perspectives that emerge from a study of IM behavior in
the Bible. First, impression management is often used to convey an image of innocence
when the actor is in fact guilty of wrongdoing. Escaping punishment can be a strong
motivation for managing one’s image. Second, impression management is sometimes
used to escape the threat of harm, control others through fear and intimidation, get help
through supplication and ingratiation, or obtain favor, rewards, and good treatment.
Therefore, IM behavior can be motivated by a variety of factors. Third, impression
management intended to deceive can be learned, practiced repeatedly, and embedded in
one’s culture. That culture can then be passed on through subsequent generations.
Deception breeds deception. Fourth, IM behavior becomes more varied and complex over
time as individuals and organizations learn a repertoire of scripts.
Chapter Summary
This review has examined several streams of literature in an effort to determine
the gaps in the current body of literature and thus the need for the proposed research. The
researcher has provided a theological perspective of impression management, describing
both a philosophical framework within which the study is embedded and a theological
perspective from which the topic of impression management is viewed. The researcher
has described the theoretical underpinnings and foundations on which the body of
impression management literature rests. A brief historical background of impression
management studies has been given, followed by a description of the evolution from
individual impression management to organizational impression management. A
taxonomy of organizational impression management has been described. This review

80
examined specific studies that are deemed especially relevant to the researcher’s focus on
OIM strategies used in the wake of an image-threatening event. Lastly, this researcher
applied the literature on IM to the biblical text for instances of impression management.
The purpose of this review has been to demonstrate the need for this study on
impression management strategies used by evangelical organizations in the wake of an
image-threatening event. The review has shown that while research to date has identified
a variety of impression management tactics used by individuals in relationship with other
individuals and in the context of organizational settings, far fewer studies have been
conducted on OIM. Of those OIM studies, only a handful have focused on how
organizations manage impressions in the wake of an image-threatening event. Among
those studies, most focused on one-time crises of accident and safety concern (e.g., an oil
spill, a plane crash, a food safety crisis) that threatened the legitimacy of important
practices or procedures (e.g., the clean-up protocol for an oil spill, the meat inspection
process at a meat packing plant). This researcher did not identify any OIM studies that
focused on scandals that threaten organizational image. Additionally, this researcher did
not identify any studies that address OIM strategies used by evangelical organizations.
81
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGICAL DESIGN
of an image-threatening event. This study was designed to provide basic research
information on organizations in crisis, specifically of the types of crisis events that
threaten organizational image, and the use of OIM during and after the crisis.
This proposed research sought to bring clarity to the use of impression
management strategies among evangelical organizations in crisis. The previous chapters
detailed the research problem and relevant literature related to the subject. In this chapter,
the methodological design is considered.
Research Question Synopsis
This research was designed to address the following questions:
organizations in the wake of image-threatening events?
Research Design
This research was designed to determine what, if any, impression management
strategies were used by certain evangelical organizations in the wake of an image-
threatening event. In order to accomplish this, a qualitative content analysis (QCA)

82
method of research was utilized. The purpose of QCA is to systematically describe the
meaning of content (Schreier, 2012). The content analysis was a detailed and systematic
examination of the contents of a specific body of material for the purpose of identifying
OIM incidents, patterns, and themes. The content analysis was performed on forms of
human communication and included press releases, newspaper articles, legal documents,
sermon transcripts, website posts, investigative reports, and other forms of verbal or
written communication. Priority was given to examining the content of organizational
communications, as opposed to individual communications, because, similar to annual
reports, they are read, revised, and approved at the highest level of the organization (e.g.,
the board of elders) before being released to the public.
Population
The population for this study was large evangelical organizations that have faced
an image-threatening event. For the purposes of this research, a large evangelical
organization is one that had at least two thousand key stakeholders at the time of the
image-threatening event. Key stakeholders might include members and employees of a
congregation, students and employees at an institute of higher education, or members and
employees of a para-church organization. This population was selected for several
reasons. First, the researcher self-identifies as a Protestant evangelical leader. This
researcher has served in evangelical organizations for more than ten years and is keenly
aware of the potential benefit such research may hold for evangelical organizations in
crisis. Second, the evangelical community has been exposed to a number of publicized
crises within evangelical organizations (see Appendix A). Third, these organizations are
representative of many beliefs commonly held among most evangelicals. Fourth, the
83
structures of these organizations are representative of many of the structures found in
many evangelical organizations. This makes the research more generalizable.
Sample
According to Benoit (2007), “Content analysis is used to measure dimensions of
content of groups of messages, so a study must identify a sample of texts” (p. 271).
Purposive sampling, which involves the selection of textual units for analysis with a
particular purpose in mind, was used for this study. The research was delimited to sample
units of analysis produced by large evangelical organizations that meet the following
criteria: (1) The organization has faced an image-threatening event. (2) The organization
occupied a high profile within its field at the time of the event. For the purposes of this
research, a high profile is indicated by the presence of a national or global reach,
evidenced by its services being known and used by people across national and global
divides. Prior literature (McDonnell & King, 2013) suggested that impression
management tends to be more pronounced in highly visible organizations. (3) The event
resulted in extensive media coverage and public statements made by the organizations,
providing a large body of content available for analysis. For the purposes of this research,
extensive media coverage was evidenced by the number of Google search results when
the name of the organization and the word scandal were used as keywords in the search.
Results numbering 200,000 or more for organizations within the local church and higher
education sectors were chosen. Results numbering 10,000 or more for organizations
within the para-church sector were chosen. (4) At the time of the event, the organization
was within one of three large evangelical sectors: local churches, institutes of higher
84
education, or para-church ministries. (5) Publicly-available statements were made by the
organization to more than one type of stakeholder.
The researcher identified three organizations that met these criteria: Mars Hill
Church, Bob Jones University, and Sovereign Grace Ministries. New Tribes Missions
was initially selected for content analysis but during the data collection phase it became
apparent that there were not enough publicly available documents addressed to more than
one stakeholder type to meet the criteria chosen for the sample. Therefore, New Tribes
Mission was removed during the data collection phase when it became evident that it did
not adequately meet the criteria set for the purposive sample.
Limitations of Generalization
This research generalizes to large evangelical organizations that have used
impression management strategies in the wake of an image-threatening event. It is
possible that similarities may exist between evangelical organizations and other
organizations that are vulnerable to image-threatening events. One may find similar
findings in non-evangelical religious organizations due to the similar purposes and roles
that such organizations possess. One may also find similar findings in public service
organizations, such as government agencies, political parties, and non-profit
organizations.
This research studied organizations that are vulnerable to crises that involve
scandal as opposed to crises that involve accidents or public safety. Therefore, this
research may not generalize to organizations that are more vulnerable to accidents and
public safety violations, such as manufacturing and environmental safety organizations.

85
This research was conducted on organizations that are well known and possess a
high standing in their field. Therefore, this research may not generalize to smaller
organizations that do not possess as great a reach.
Research Method
Qualitative methods were used that rely heavily on an inductive approach to
content analysis with an emphasis on pulling codes, categories, or themes directly from
the data.
Qualitative content analysis (QCA) was used. According to Schreier (2012), QCA
always involves the same sequence of steps, regardless of the content and the research
questions. These steps include choosing research questions, selecting content,
constructing a coding frame, dividing content into units of coding, testing the coding
frame, discussing units that were coded differently, evaluating the coding for its
consistency and reliability and revising the frame or training accordingly, coding all the
material using the revised version of the coding frame, and interpreting and presenting
the findings.
Conventional content analysis (CCA) guided the data collection and analysis.
CCA is useful when the researcher is attempting to describe a phenomenon, and when
existing theory and research in the area of inquiry are limited. Results from a CCA can be
used to develop concepts and related models (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).
According to Benoit (2007), “Content analysis is a means of measuring or
quantifying dimensions of the content of messages” (p. 268). Lombard, Snyder-Duch,
and Bracken (2002) argued that content analysis is the central work of those who study
mass communication and analyze messages. This explains why many of the studies done
86
on OIM strategies have utilized content analysis (Brennan, Guillamón-Saorín, & Pierce,
2013; Caillouet, 1991; Cao et al., 2013; Chilcutt, 2009; Craig and Brennan, 2012; Craig,
Mortensen, & Iyer, 2013; Hall, Pennington, & Lueders, 2013; Huang, Huang, Wu, &
Hsieh, 2011; Lamertz and Martens, 2011; McDonnell & King, 2013; O’Keefe &
Conway, 2008; Parhankangas & Ehrlich, 2012; Patelli & Pedrini, 2013; Pollach &
Kerbler, 2011; Tetlock, Saar-Tsechansky, & Macskassy, 2008; Tyler et al., 2012).
Protocols
Because this is a qualitative study, the researcher served as the key interpreter.
The role of the researcher was to collect data himself through examining written and
verbal text. This researcher did not use or rely on questionnaires or instruments
developed by other researchers to collect data (Creswell, 2014).
This researcher does not have any current or prior connection with any of the
organizations selected for content analysis. Given the subjectivity of the interpretation,
this researcher acknowledges the potential for bias. This researcher recognizes that the
researcher’s analysis may have been shaped by the researcher’s own experiences of OIM.
This firsthand experience of OIM strategies used in the wake of an image-threatening
event informs this research. This researcher also acknowledges the sensitive nature of the
content and the spiritual and emotional effect that such exposure may have on the
researcher. In view of this, one may contend that the researcher lacks the critical distance
necessary for the analysis of the complex interactions between organizations and
stakeholders and that the researcher’s analysis might be unduly biased against the
organizations.
87
In order to guard the integrity of the research, this researcher used the careful and
thorough review of the IM and OIM literature to inform the coding frame and process.
This researcher also sought to be as objective as possible in the selection of organizations
used for the research and maintained the integrity of the research through careful data
collection, segmenting, organizing, and coding, and through transparent reporting of the
protocols that were followed.
Once the data was collected and a set of categories established, the actual analysis
of content proceeded. A codebook using qualitative content analysis software consisting
of protocols was developed and utilized to assist the researcher in the process of coding.
The software specified key terms, the specific part of the text to be coded, and the context
unit. The protocols also described what steps to follow when multiple variables are
coded, provided distinct and clear definitions of each category with examples of each,
and provided coding rules that the researcher followed when applying categories to
textual units from the sample (Benoit, 2007). Appendix B contains the rules followed for
coding, and Appendix C displays the coding frame.
Procedures
The following section outlines the phases that comprised the research process.
The phases outlined are typical among content analysis methods that attempt to be as
systematic and objective as possible (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013).
Data Collection Phase
In the data collection phase, the researcher identified the specific body of material
to be examined. Each body of material was examined by the researcher in its entirety
(Leedy & Ormrod, 2013). Data was collected from forms of human communication that
88
were available at the time of collection and included press releases, newspaper articles,
legal documents, sermon transcripts, website posts, investigative reports, and other forms
of verbal or written communication. Priority was given to collecting content of
organizational communications, as opposed to individual communications, because,
similar to annual reports, they are read, revised, and approved at the highest level of the
organization (e.g., the board of elders) before being released to the public.
Content was stored securely in a document management software application
called DEVONthink. Content was clearly labeled and organized. Any content chosen for
analysis was then uploaded to Dedoose, an online application for analyzing qualitative
research. Dedoose was used to create excerpts, conduct coding, and analyze results.
This researcher broke lengthy or complex content units into small, manageable
excerpts that were analyzed separately (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013). The goal of this phase
was to separate bodies of text into units of analysis that contained a unified statement of a
particular point that stood apart from the body of the publication. In media articles, press
releases, and investigative reports, only statements in direct quotes were included in the
analysis. This segmentation took place independent of and prior to the coding.
Creation of a Coding Frame Phase
For each unit of analysis, a content analysis frame guided the researcher in
making judgments regarding the presence of two nominal variables: impression
management strategies and stakeholders. This researcher used categories and definitions
of OIM strategies based on the review of the precedent literature and on the examination
of the collected content. The strategies examined were defined in discrete, understandable
terms, and examples of each strategy were used from the data to aid in bringing clarity
89
and distinction to terms (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013). This researcher found support of the
established groupings from an established OIM taxonomy (Mohamed et al., 1999).
This researcher also identified relevant stakeholders on the basis of the precedent
literature review and the examination of the collected content. The stakeholders were
defined in concrete, understandable terms, and examples of each stakeholder type were
provided to assist with the coding procedure.
The codings of the impression management strategies were used to assess
research question one. The codings of the stakeholder types were used to assess research
question two. To assess reliability of the coding frame the researcher checked for
unidimensionality, mutual exclusiveness, and exhaustiveness (Schreier, 2012). Each
dimension of the coding frame only captured one aspect of OIM tactics. In other words, a
tactic could not be added to more than one category. Additionally, the subcategories for
excuses and justifications were mutually exclusive. Adding further reliability to the
coding frame, the researcher was able to assign each unit of coding to at least one
category. In this sense, the coding frame achieved exhaustiveness (Schreier, 2012). The
researcher did not need to create an other or miscellaneous category. Lastly, by primarily
relying on an established taxonomy of OIM tactics, the researcher was able to give
greater reliability to the coding frame.
Data Coding Phase
In the data coding phase, the researcher examined each content unit for instances
of each OIM strategy defined in the taxonomy developed in phase 2. Using qualitative
content analysis coding software, the researcher applied codes to each excerpt. The
90
researcher then compared all excerpts for each code to check for consistency. The
researcher did not find that any codes were misapplied.
Some may suggest that using more than one coder would increase the reliability
of the coding. However, Schreier (2012) argued that additional coders should only be
used if those coders are expert coders like the researcher himself. Intra-coder reliability is
preferred over inter-coder reliability when no other expert coders are available. Given
how unexplored the field of OIM still is and how long it took this researcher to develop
an understanding of all the various IM and OIM tactics, it was better for one who is
familiar with the research topic to code alone than to use two or three coders who were
relatively unfamiliar with the field.
Weber (1990) noted, “To make valid inferences from the text, it is important that
the classification procedure be reliable in the sense of being consistent: Different people
should code the same text in the same way” (p. 12). In the absence of a research team
utilizing multiple coders, Schreier (2012) suggested checking for consistency by coding
the content at two different points in time. Because this researcher was the only coder,
this researcher coded the material twice, with at least two weeks between the first and the
second coding, in order to determine the consistency of the coding. This researcher did
not code any of the content differently the second time than the first time, suggesting this
researcher was familiar with the definitions of the codes and how they should be applied.
Schreier (2012) suggested that this consistency speaks to the stability of the coding frame
and coding process.

91
Methods of Analysis
In this phase, the nominal data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis
software. This researcher identified the mode as an indicator of the most frequently
occurring strategy within the data set. This researcher calculated the frequency of each
impression management strategy used. This researcher used crosstabulations to compare
the relative frequencies of impression management strategies in various categories.
Tables and graphs are used in Chapter 4 as a way of reporting tabulations for each
nominal variable in a concise, organized fashion (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013).
This analysis compared the OIM taxonomy with the stakeholder taxonomy,
providing data tables to display any significant two-way interactions. For example, this
researcher displays a data table that shows the frequency of OIM strategies in relation to
each stakeholder type. Following the recommendations of Schreier (2012), data is also
presented in Chapter 4 using continuous text. Schreier (2012) suggested continuous text
when presenting qualitative content analysis data. Following her guidance, the researcher
does not repeat the full definition for each OIM strategy but does summarize the core of
the strategies and the concepts underlying them. Examples from the content are provided
to illustrate the codes. According to Schreier (2012), providing example excerpts is
helpful in QCA because it demonstrates to readers how the codes were expressed in the
content.
Timeline
The research was conducted over the course of approximately six months,
beginning in October 2017. The data collection phase took approximately two months.
The coding phase took approximately two months. The analysis phase took
92
approximately two months and included the data analysis and the writing of Chapters 4
and 5.
Chapter Summary
This chapter described the method of data collection and analysis. Content
analysis of relevant written and verbal communications made by evangelical
organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event should assist in identifying
which impression management strategies an organization uses in such situations to
manage its image. An understanding of the theological and biblical perspective of OIM
behavior can guide an organization in its attempt to respond to image-threatening events
in ways that promote the light-side leadership qualities of truth-telling and transparency.
93
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS
This chapter offers an in-depth analysis of the findings of the qualitative content
analysis conducted on impression management strategies used by evangelical
organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event. This chapter consists of four
main segments: an explanation of the protocols followed, a presentation and analysis of
data, an evaluation of the research design, and conclusions.
Explanations of Protocols
This qualitative content analysis followed a sequence of steps typical to the
chosen methodological design. This adherence to conventional content analysis was an
attempt to be as systematic and objective as possible. It consisted of three primary
phases: data collection, the creation of a coding frame, and coding. This section describes
the precise steps taken in each phase along with the rationale for the chosen protocols.
The first phase consisted of collecting publicly available written and verbal
content created by the selected organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event.
A thorough internet search was conducted to procure all the available material released to
stakeholders by the organization. Statements released on organizational blogs, social
media platforms, and websites were downloaded and stored in a content database.
Organizational accounts presented in the form of audio or video mediums were
transcribed verbatim and stored in DEVONthink. The findings released by investigative
and mediation services enlisted by the organization were also collected and scoured for
organizational accounts presented to investigators and mediators. Media reports that
addressed the image-threatening events were read carefully to identify any and all
94
statements made by the organizations to media outlets. Certain websites and blogs have
been created by individuals to track and comment on the events themselves. Some of
these websites contained links to statements that have since been removed from the
organization’s websites. This researcher used internet archive services to locate the
removed content. This researcher was able to procure every publicly referenced
organizational statement that was released but later removed by the organization.
The second phase involved the creation of a coding frame. It began with a careful
reading of each document collected in phase one. A determination was made as to
whether or not an established OIM taxonomy (Mohamed et al., 1999) would be suitable
for the collected content. The researcher determined the OIM taxonomy developed by
Mohamed et al. (1999) would serve as an appropriate basis for the coding frame.
Additional strategies identified in the precedent literature review and identified in the
collected content were added to the codebook. Each code was defined in discrete,
understandable terms, and examples of each were provided. As part of this phase, the
researcher also identified and defined the various stakeholder types represented in the
data. The researcher created a taxonomy of stakeholder types for each case.
The third phase consisted of the coding of the content through the use of Dedoose.
Documents were broken up into excerpts or units of analysis on the basis of the relevance
of the excerpt to the research questions. Each and every excerpt for a case was then coded
under the direction of the coding frame. Each excerpt was assigned an OIM strategy and
a stakeholder type.
95
Presentation of Data
In this section, the data is demonstrated in a sequential, systematic manner
organized around the three focal research questions. The research questions are addressed
sequentially and the results for each case are displayed for each research question. Cases
are displayed in the following order: BJU, SGM, and MHC. This order follows the order
in which this researcher collected and read the content for each case. For RQ1, cross
tabulation tables are displayed for each of the organizations selected for the sample. The
tables display the frequency with which each of the identified OIM strategies were used.
For RQ2, descriptor tables display which impression management strategies occurred in
the organizations’ messages directed to each of the categorized stakeholders. Overall
findings are provided and discussed. For RQ3, the results for each of the selected
organizations are compared and contrasted. This includes a discussion about similarities
and differences between the OIM strategies used by each of the organizations and if
similar strategies were used across the chosen organizations for the same stakeholder
types.
Data is primarily presented using continuous text. Schreier (2012) suggested
continuous text when presenting qualitative content analysis data. Following her
guidance, the researcher does not repeat the full definition for each OIM strategy but does
summarize the core of the strategies and the concepts underlying them. Examples from
the content is provided to illustrate the codes. According to Schreier (2012), providing
example excerpts is helpful in QCA because it demonstrates to readers how the codes
were expressed in the content. No citations are included for these quotations as they
would add an impractical amount of sources to the reference list. However, original
96
documents from which the excerpts are sourced have been stored in DEVONthink for use
as needed in future research. Each excerpt was derived from a source that was available
to the public during the data collection phase.
Research Question 1
This researcher conducted a qualitative content analysis of content collected from
three organizations: Bob Jones University, Sovereign Grace Ministries, and Mars Hill
Church. An analysis of the data sought to answer the question, which, if any, impression
management strategies were employed by the organizations in the wake of an image-
threatening event? In this section, the data relevant to that question is displayed for each
organization.
Bob Jones University. A total of 180,462 words contained in written and verbal
files relevant to the response of Bob Jones University to a negative event were read as
part of the data collection phase. 185 units of analysis were identified and coded for OIM
tactics. Seven different stakeholder types were identified as targets of the strategies:
employees, investigators, alumni, public, student body, victims, and media.
Crosstabulations suggested that denial of volition, a form of excuse, was the
primary impression management strategy (𝑛 = 47) emerging from BJU’s messages.
Prosocial behavior occurred 37 times, followed by organizational promotion (22),
negative events misrepresented (14), boasting (9), denial of victim (8), opinion
conformity (8), burying (7), organizational handicapping (6), flattery (5), exemplification
(5), blaring (4), blurring (3), denial of intention (3), denial of agency (3), supplication (2),
condemning the condemner (2), burnishing (2), blasting (2), belittling (1), boosting (1),
comparison with industry practices (1), restitution (1), and apology (1).
97
BJU utilized a total of 24 different strategies spread across 185 units of analysis.
Some of these strategies were forms of ingratiation, excuse, or justification. Ingratiation
strategies (flattery and opinion conformity) were used 17 times, excuse strategies (denial
of volition, denial of intention, and denial of agency) were used 56 times, and
justification strategies (denial of injury and denial of victim) were used eight times.
Ingratiation strategies consisted of five uses of flattery and eight uses of opinion
conformity. Excuse strategies consisted predominantly of denial of volition (50),
followed by denial of intent (3) and denial of agency (3). Justification strategies were
only found in the denial of victim category (8).
BJU’s primary efforts focused on defensive strategies such as denial of volition
and negative events misrepresented and assertive strategies such as prosocial behavior,
organizational promotion, and ingratiation. Table 2 displays a crosstabulation of the OIM
strategies used by BJU.
Table 2
Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by BJU

Student Body
Investigators
Employees
Victims
Alumni
Public
Media
Total
Ingratiation 2 4 4 2 1 13
Flattery 1 2 1 1 5
Opinion 2 3 2 1 8
Conformity
Organizational 4 7 11 22
Promotion
Intimidation 0
Exemplification 1 2 1 1 5
Supplication 1 1 2
98
Table 2–Continued. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by BJU
Student Body
Investigators
Employees
Victims
Alumni
Public
Media
Total
Excuse 52 4 56
Denial of 3 3
Intention
Denial of 47 3 50
Volition
Denial of 2 1 3
Agency
Justification 8 8
Denial of
Injury
Denial of 8 8
Victim
Condemning 1 1 2
the Condemner
Negative 13 1 14
Events
Misrepresented
Organizational 2 4 6
Handicapping
Apology 1 1
Restitution 1 1
Comparison 1 1
with Industry
Practices
Prosocial 9 20 7 1 37
Behavior
Boasting 3 4 2 9
Blaring 1 3 4
Burnishing 1 1 1 2
Blasting 1 1 2
Burying 3 2 2 7
Blurring 1 1 1 3
Boosting 1 1
Belittling 1 1
99
Excuse. BJU repeatedly used excuses when giving an account of their
organizational behavior. The primary form of excuse used was denial of volition. Denial
of volition seeks to escape responsibility for any decisions or behaviors that caused a
negative event by denying the organization had any control over the event itself or the
decisions and behaviors that caused the negative event. This is seen in BJU’s statement
regarding a lack of understanding of a victim’s trauma:
I was personally grieved in my communication with one of the victims who had
suffered immeasurably at the hands of her perpetrator. I was also grieved to learn
that when she came to us for comfort and guidance she left disappointed, deeply
hurt, and confused. In her case we did not understand the depths of her trauma.
It is also seen in using the analogy of sleep to suggest that the organization at the time did
not possess the needed awareness of the problem: “We are all awakening to the
magnitude of the issue and more publicly addressing it and the trauma it inflicts on
victims.” In another statement, BJU suggested they were too slow in responding to the
need: “These are things we should have seen and fixed before now, but we were too slow
in responding to the need.” One faculty member repeatedly brought attention to BJU’s
lack of training and expertise:
I know in talking with some of our counseling folks, when I was in

seminary, we did talk a little bit about abuse and things like that in the early 90s,
but I know our counseling people said we were behind the curve from like the
80’s to the early 90’s as things were mandatory reporting and just as best practices
were kind of firming up as it came more widely publicized and people were
talking about it. But we were behind the ball on that and so particularly we knew
we had probably underserved a group of students in that period where our
counselors wouldn’t have known really how to help and support victims.
You know, it is always best for somebody to be teaching something who

has done it a lot. I have done it some. I would not say, even with over thirty years,
even though we have had two to three hundred of these situations, the amount of
time spent with them with me personally has been as much as I could but because
they are women and I have other things to do, someone else has to follow up and
so forth. That is why I said, if we are going to do something to upgrade our
100
teaching out there it needs to be done by somebody else. I am looked at as the

expert here, only because I have done it more than anybody else. But I am not an
expert at it in the sense of somebody who has devoted their life to this and most of
their counseling has been in this.... And if this is somebody where this is all they
are doing, I think they would be better at it. I am supposedly some kind of an
expert here only by default. I would not say by ambition on my part or by- I have
had more experience than anybody, but the experience is not like somebody who
is doing this all the time.”
If there were any major counseling things with the women, I got them and
if there were any major counseling things with the men, generally the Dean of
Men took them. That is why these all ended up in my camp because there was not
anybody on the women’s side with any background in counseling. I wouldn’t say
I had a huge background, but I had a huge interest.
Denial of volition also appeared in statements suggesting BJU was not set up to respond
well to the needs of victims due to its “revivalist flavor” and “battle field” environment
characterized by high activity:
Revivalist flavor does create an eagerness to bring real solutions to a person. And
so that is stronger in my mind than having to make sure that I am pacing myself at
the same pace that they are going.
What really can and perhaps should be done longer term with people is that what
they got help probably felt more like a medic on a battle field than it did a long
stay in a rehabilitation center, you know?
A faculty member attributed certain decisions and practices to BJU’s family culture:
I would say in the matter of confidentiality, I would have to look back on that and
say we were sloppy on that because the framework here is kind of a family thing.
I would sit down with my Dean of Women and Dean of Men and we would talk
about what is happening as a mom and dad would communicate in a home.
This same faculty member suggested he was not equipped to respond
appropriately to victims because of the amount of other responsibilities he had:
My study of sexual abuse was done while I was dean of students and while I was
studying a number of other topics: leadership development, management and
administration, other counseling topics, and spiritual growth and discipleship.
Counseling victims of sexual abuse was a small part of my counseling load.
Counseling itself was a small part of my administrative duties as dean of students.
101
Denial of volition emerged most frequently in statements regarding BJU’s
ignorance regarding the legal requirements for reporting a crime:
“In counseling, I think the thing that is really becoming much more of a front
burner approach in my mind in the last few years, I would say 3-5 years, is the
legal obligation that you have in these situations. I don’t know that was ever
stressed. It’s not that I sensed anyone was trying to cover that up like it wasn’t a
big deal but maybe some of it was because I didn’t have an immediate connection
with legal authorities myself.”
“A failure to report, especially early on, was not an attempt to cover up anything-
it was pure ignorance of what to do.”
“The facts are those things were not handled well. They were handled with what
we knew, but they were not handled with what we should have known and I can
guarantee you that it would be handled differently today.”
“It never crossed my mind that it was a crime- it was not just that it was not clear;
it never crossed my mind.”
“But I will tell you, even at that point [in approximately 2006 or 2007], I am still
thinking of crimes as- I would definitely look at this that way, but I am thinking
of forcible rape. I am thinking about crimes in that sense. I am not thinking about
an 18 year old and a 15 year old having sex together when both of them want to
do this. I am not thinking in those terms as crime. I do now.”
“So there is very little- there is a great deal of concern we have about God’s moral
law, but I am not out there looking for, ‘What does the secular law say about this
too?’ We are not required as an educational institution to be attending seminars on
things as a public institution might. And we probably should have been aware of
that, but weren’t. I know I wasn’t.”
“We were looking at this as a moral offense, not a criminal offense. Hopefully
today we would see that. I know that never even crossed our mind as a criminal
activity.”
“What I am saying is, when I look at this today, I look at this as somebody who is
taking sexual opportunities with a person who is not able to defend herself in any
way or even resist. Well that is a criminal effect. That is a criminal thing. That
would have never been a thought [at that time].”
“If someone was forcibly raped, obviously that is so obvious it would be. But this
was not obvious to me as a crime and to the way we thought at that time as a
crime. I say we didn’t even weigh it as, ‘Well it is not this so therefore it is not a
crime.’ There wasn’t even a weighing of that. There just was not any
102
consciousness that it even entered into that realm. We just knew we had a very,
very immoral guy, and he needs to go home and bear the responsibility for what
he did.”
“I am just telling you the reality. I am not defending that reality. I am just saying,
that was the reality here. But, what I will defend is that this was not ever an effort
to keep this from being reported as a crime. Never. Once we understood
something as a crime, it went down as a crime.”
“I will tell you, at this time, we were looking at this as a moral offense, not a
criminal offense. Hopefully today we would see that. I know that never even
crossed our mind as a criminal activity. It crossed our mind that there was a huge
moral breach here and [the perpetrator] needed to go home.... What I am saying
is, when I look at this today, I look at this as somebody who is taking sexual
opportunities with a person who is not able to defend herself in any way or even
resist. Well that is a criminal effect. That is a criminal thing. That would have
never been a thought.”
“Knowing what we know today, we blew it...I don’t have any defense except that
I was not thinking that way. That was just not the mindset at that point. I don’t
have anything else to say about it. Looking at it, there is not a defense. I can’t say
that we did it for this reason and this reason, we weighed these and decided to do
that; we didn’t weigh anything, we didn’t know anything to weigh. Looking at it
today, it should not have been handled that way. I can see how it looks to you. It
looks really strange that we are this ignorant but we are-we were.”
“We were very strong in the moral and Biblical things and the ethical things and
probably a whole lot stronger than a lot of people would think was reasonable.
But in framing that as a legal and a criminal thing was not part of the package of
thinking. I am not excusing it; I am just explaining it, okay? When I look at that, I
am- like in some of these other things, I am totally embarrassed. I have no defense
except ignorance. And I know ignorance of the law is no excuse. I am just
throwing that out.”
BJU also used the excuse of denial of agency, a tactic that argues that they
themselves did not make a particular decision or perform a specific behavior that caused
a negative event, leading stakeholders to believe that they did not produce the negative
event in question (Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981). For example, BJU suggested that one
particular case was not brought to their attention.

103
BJU used the excuse of denial of intention to suggest that there was never any
motive to cover-up a crime. The implication is that the decisions they made were
accidental and unintentional, were irrespective of the organization’s practices, and they
would have made a different decision had they been fully informed. This is most clearly
seen in this statement to investigators:
The motive is not obvious to people and they can put any motive they want onto
the facts. If they have a beef with us or even if they don’t and they hear about
other situations where there are intentional cover-ups, it can look like that is our
motive but that is not our motive.
Prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior was the second-most used tactic. It is a
direct defensive OIM tactic that highlights the organization’s involvement in prosocial
actions in an attempt to atone for mistakes and convince stakeholders and/or the public
that the organization merits a positive image. Such claims demonstrate to the public that
the organization is committed to socially acceptable behaviors, beliefs, and values. They
are designed to protect the image of the organization by diluting, rather than refuting,
negative claims about the organization (McDonnell & King, 2013). This tactic does not
address claims directly but instead attempts to divert attention to the perceived positive
attributes of the organization. Prosocial behavior was used in some instances to suggest
that BJU is law-abiding:
“Sexual abuse and assault are growing challenges for society. They are heinous
crimes and perpetrators must be brought to justice by our system of law.”
“Well naturally, you don’t want unnecessary negative attention to be brought. But
we have historically, if somebody has stolen, if somebody is a shoplifter, anything
like that is taken to the police. Anything that requires the law to be involved, the
law is involved in. Not just about sexual abuse, but about anything. Where a law
has been broken, we deal with the law enforcement. If a student is involved in
drunken driving, they go to jail; they are arrested, and they go to jail. Mother and
dad have to come down and get them out and get involved. You are always going
to handle something short of the law if you can in good conscience and there is no
104
demand of the law for something to be handled by the law. But anything that is
deserving of the law’s attention or mandated by the law to do, you turn it over to
the law.”
“You are always going to handle something short of the law if you can in good
conscience and there is no demand of the law for something to be handled by the
law. But anything that is deserving of the law’s attention or mandated by the law
to do, you turn it over to the law.”
“I expected everybody to follow-through on every report that they got to find out
the veracity of it and to deal with whatever the truth was and to get to the truth.
That is the way that we operate.”
“Our public safety people know the law and work closely with our law
enforcement, and we have a criminal justice program. They know what they are
supposed to do.”
“If they were supposed to report this, then they better have reported it. And if they
should have and didn’t, I would be the first one to insist that they do. So, they’re
delegated the authority under law to know what they are supposed to do, and if
they were supposed to do it, they would have done it.”
“In every case where somebody has made a criminal charge against somebody,
we don’t make that judgment; law enforcement makes that judgment.”
“We are committed to ensuring BJU’s policies and procedures for handling
reports of sexual abuse/assault reflect best practices; facilitate a loving,
compassionate, scripturally based response to reports of sexual abuse and sexual
assault; and remain in full compliance with federal and state laws.”
“An external attorney licensed in South Carolina who previously served in a

prosecutorial role with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and is knowledgeable regarding
reporting obligations under South Carolina law conducted a review of our files
that we are aware reference sexual abuse/assault. The review did not uncover any
instances where the University failed to comply with its reporting obligations.”
“BJU policy designates all employees as mandatory reporters of child sexual

abuse. This policy exceeds both state and federal legal requirements.”
“Today we would have aggressively involved police. It is not a plan to cover it

up. We have not suddenly come to a fear driven response, oh we have to make
sure we do this now because we have been covering and we are about to be
exposed. It is not that. Every time we figured out more to do, we did that. But I
know how it looks.”
105
The tactic of prosocial behavior was identified in certain statements related to a
concern for victims and a willingness to do what is right even if the reputation of the
organization suffers as a result:
“The reason we have been silent is that we do not want the focus to be on us. We
wanted our former students who were victims of sexual abuse to know that they
were more important to us than even our own institutional reputation.”
“Many of these victims reached out to our faculty and staff for help and were
lovingly served and comforted.”
“We are committed to providing a place of solace to victims of sexual

abuse/assault.”
“We are committed to communicating with and seeking the forgiveness of any
former students or other individuals who came to us in their time of need and did
not experience the loving, comforting environment they deserved.”
“It is not a perfect campus, but it is the best we know how. If our best has not
been good enough, then we want to hear from those that we failed with so we can
make it right the best we know how. That is where we are. That is us.”
“As stated, we greatly desire direct personal contact with each victim of sexual
abuse or assault who was not helped by our response to their disclosure. While we
realize months or even years may pass before some survivors are willing to talk
with us, the invitation for dialogue is open and will remain open. We sincerely
want to better understand their individual experiences. We want to be of
assistance to them and to hear their suggestions for improving our response to
victims. If former students who were abuse/assault survivors will contact the BJU
president’s office, we will arrange a meeting with the president or other university
representative with whom the victim will be comfortable speaking.”
“We feel great sorrow for former students who suffered sexual abuse/assault and
did not find help at BJU. We greatly desire to speak directly with those who
reported we did not serve them well.”
“We undertook this project to continue to improve the ways we minister to our
students, particularly those who have suffered sexual abuse or assault.”
“We are committed to continue to compassionately serve our student body with
care and protection, recognizing the importance of every single individual.”
106
“We want every student, and especially victims of abuse, to feel that they can be
transparent without fear and that we are providing a safe environment for those
who are seeking help.”
“Appropriately responding to victims is more important than our institutional

reputation.”
Additional prosocial behavior tactics focused on future behaviors and optimistic
outlooks:
“We don’t want this to happen again. We pledge to you, that by God’s grace, we
will use the things we have learned to further improve what we are doing to help
sexual abuse and sexual assault victims.”
“This is something that we have been working on for some time and will continue
to work on.”
“We want to learn from the past. Our students deserve this. Our faculty and staff
desire this and our God demands this. We want to serve our students by showing
that we value relationships.”
“I don't want us to forget what happened because I—and I know you—never want
this to happen again.”
Lastly, some prosocial behavior tactics appeared in statements that drew attention
to demonstrations of efforts made to improve the organization’s readiness and response to
sexual assault and abuse:
“We have begun reviewing all sermons and materials cited in the report. These
materials are being evaluated on the basis of Scriptural accuracy and our
developing understanding of the issues associated with sexual abuse and assault.
We will remove any that do not reflect sound biblical teaching or are found to be
insensitive to abuse or assault victims.”
“In the last two years, the University has completed two rounds of Abuse and
Neglect Policy reviews and updates. In 2013 we rewrote our policy document
with local legal assistance and in 2014 updated the policy with the assistance of
MinistrySafe.”
“We will continue to work with an organization such as MinistrySafe to assist

with an annual review and update of policies related to abuse response and
prevention. This review will be done in conjunction with our Title IX coordinator.
Our goal will continue to be policies and procedures that ensure a loving,
107
compassionate, scripturally based response to abuse/assault victims and that

continue to conform to both South Carolina reporting requirements and Title IX
and Clery Act requirements.”
“While Bob Jones Academy employees follow mandatory reporting requirements,

the Academy currently has a number of other policies for the Child Development
Center, the use of volunteers, etc. With the assistance of MinistrySafe, we are
preparing a consolidated student safety policy manual for BJA tailored
specifically to ensuring the continued safety of minors. It will incorporate all BJA
policies into one manual.”
“Each October the University works with MinistrySafe to conduct Abuse/Assault

Awareness Training which is mandatory for all new university students and all
new university or academy employees. After attending the training session, each
individual is required to take and pass an online quiz in order to receive a
certificate of completion. We have trained approximately 5,000 students, faculty
and staff the past two years and will continue this training on an annual basis.”
“In spring 2015, we will formalize a plan for refresher training, including how
frequently faculty and staff will attend the training in person and how frequently
they will require refresher training via video. The plan will also specify how soon
new hires will be trained.”
“As a follow-up to this training, with the assistance of MinistrySafe and

appropriate academic deans, faculty and staff, existing guidelines are being
reviewed and enhanced where appropriate for the following students who work
with or come in contact with minors on or off campus.”
Organizational promotion. BJU used organizational promotion tactics more than
any other direct assertive tactic. Organizational promotion tactics consist of behaviors
that present the organization as being capable and successful by spotlighting their
accomplishments and noble efforts. Such tactics were seen in relation to BJU’s decision
to open itself up to investigation:
“As a member of the higher education community, we want to ensure we have

appropriate and loving policies and procedures for responding to individuals when
they disclose abuse or assault.”
“In 2012, Bob Jones University voluntarily undertook an unprecedented review of

its policies and procedures for responding to students who reveal they were
abused or assaulted, primarily before they enrolled as students.”
108
“In taking this bold step, we subjected ourselves to potential misunderstanding

and criticism.”
“This review was completely voluntary—it was not undertaken in response to a

specific incident or issue—and it was unprecedented.”
“We did it voluntarily because we wanted to know: Did something fall through
the cracks? If so, we want to know.... If we cause that pain, if we can do anything
in retrospect to ease that pain, we are ready; we want to.”
Organizational promotion tactics were identified in statements that demonstrated BJU’s
commitment to integrity:
“But we have to own this problem, and we have to have the courage to deal with
it in the right way for God’s glory.”
“The only thing for us to do is to do the right thing—for the victims, for our
students, and for the individuals we serve.”
“We will go to the Supreme Court over something we believe and we don’t care
what people think about it. And if we have done wrong, when we finally realize it,
whether it was on our inter-racial dating thing, we will say it.”
Some organizational promotion tactics presented an optimistic outlook on the present and
future state of BJU:
“We are going to be a better university because of today.”
“If former students who are victims of abuse visited BJU today, I truly believe
they would see and feel for themselves the love we have and the safe campus we
provide for our students.”
“I believe if you came to the campus you would sense an atmosphere that is
humble, transparent, and loving.”
“Let me say that this attitude is truly the BJU of today! This is who we are.”
Negative events misrepresented. The third most frequently used tactic was the
defensive strategy of negative events mispresented in which an organization claims
details of an event are being taken out of context, misconstrued, or fabricated:

109
“I know many of you are saying to yourselves that what I’ve said about our
discipline culture and counseling response isn't a fair reflection of BJU as a
whole. I know it's not.”
“That does make us open for criticism about cover up, but that is not why it was
handled that way.”
“There is not a culture here to protect BJU image.”
Ingratiation. Ingratiation is a direct assertive tactic used to convey an image of
likeability, favor, and trust. Two forms of ingratiation were identified in the content:
opinion conformity and flattery. Opinion conformity tactics were utilized to state a shared
understanding with concerned students and a desire to conform with the needs of victims:
“You can help us change and improve. We want the opportunity to have a
connection with you.”
“If you will contact my office, we will do all we can to make that connection
happen. You will be our welcomed guest. We would like to meet with you and
better understand your personal experience and how we could have done better.”
“I don't want us to forget what happened because I—and I know you—never want
this to happen again.”
“I know that what I have said is difficult for some of us. I understand!”
Flattery puts the spotlight on the positive attributes of the target of the communication.
Flattery focused on the primary importance of students, expressions of love and respect
for students and employees, shared bonds with alumni, affirming alumni for living out of
biblical values, and commending the patience, kindness, and hope of employees:
“Thank you for your courage to speak out on behalf of those who will attend BJU
in the future.”
“Let me also say to those former students who participated in the review—we
want to hear your story. You matter to us.”
“To our student body, I want you to know that we love you and are committed to
your well–being—you are the BJU of today!”
110
“Let me say to our alumni—I look forward to your coming back to see BJU
today. I was just on a 7–city tour out west and met scores of alumni who are
living out the biblical values they learned while students here at BJU.”
“I would like to express my love and respect for our faculty and staff. Throughout
this entire report process, you have been patient, kind and hopeful.”
Denial of victim. Denial of victim is a form of justification in which organizations
argue that no innocent individuals have been negatively affected by decisions or events.
If individuals have been harmed by a negative event, the organization may suggest that
such harm was deserving or self-inflicting. The decisions and behaviors made by the
organization were appropriate since no individual was negatively affected who didn’t
deserve such consequences:
“I think that people internally are angry at God for allowing this to happen. So
you have to get beyond that and it is a very difficult thing to get beyond because I
can’t tell you why something like this happened. I can tell you it did happen but I
can’t tell you why it happened or why the Lord allowed it to happen. I assume
that there is some reason that this has happened and that you have to work it out
within your own mind about why, and it is interesting that in many cases that it
really is the root problem. The girl may have caused it to start and that is the root
problem with her and she has to handle that somehow or another.”
“I mean if she is aggressive with a man, then she may have caused it. It is pretty
easy for things like that to get started between individuals. I think that generally a
girl will feel guilty about it, she will feel that she shouldn’t have had anything to
do with it, but she knows down in her heart that she did have something to do
with it.”
“I think you explain that to them and what they have done is a sin just like what
he has done is a sin and they can be forgiven of that sin and cleansed from it.”
“I think that, and this may be a misconception, but I think that girls have a
tendency to be emotional and sometimes see things not exactly as they were, but
that could be wrong.”
“I don’t recall but I don’t doubt because in my previous conversations with her
she came in because she said that she was very rebellious her last year of high
school, she got into drinking, profanity, and so forth...So if I recalled that, it
would not be unusual for me to say, ‘Were you- you are not responsible for what
happened to you here, but was there any part of this that you are- that you feel
111
very guilty about that you need to get cleared out of this so we can deal with what
is the other part of it is. I very well may have done that. I did do that with people,
and I may have done that with her. But that wasn’t saying, ‘Your sin here caused
that.’ There is logical cause and effect if you do something wrong and you end up
in the wrong place, but that is not- I am never going to fault a girl for a rape on
this thing. But she is going to bear guilt for what she did do wrong here . . .”
“Well, nobody who is a genuine victim of rape would ever be expelled. She
would be dealt with great compassion and a desire to help her put her life back
together. It would not be a discipline matter for the university. She would receive
no discipline for that. That would be unheard of.”
Exemplification. BJU was the only organization to use the direct assertive
strategy of exemplification. This strategy attempts to create a positive impression by
suggesting the organization is unique and therefore a role model for others to follow. The
following excerpts demonstrate this tactic:
“To be honest, I have the greatest admiration for Stephen Jones, who wanted to be
an example to the United States of America, being the first faith-based
organization to put ourselves in the position to review the way we've done things
over the years . . .”
“In 2012, Bob Jones University voluntarily undertook an unprecedented review of

its policies and procedures for responding to students who reveal they were
abused or assaulted, primarily before they enrolled as students.”
“In fact, Stephen and his administration were so sensitive to this, as you are well
aware, they engaged GRACE because they wanted to take the lead among Bible
Christians to say, ‘This is the way things have to be done. We want to set a
standard. We want to give a wake up call to the Christian community,’ knowing
in the process of making ourselves vulnerable like this.”
“We also made a commitment that we would endeavor to become a leader in

higher education in the prevention and proper counseling and assistance of sexual
abuse and sexual assault.”
Apology and restitution. This researcher identified one instance of apology and
one instance of restitution. The apology, however, did not admit responsibility for
harming any individuals. The apology pointed to the harm that had already been inflicted
on them by another and apologized that students did not feel that the organization was as
112
helpful to them as they could have been. They admitted their response was wrong and
unacceptable but did not invite any penalty. The single instance of restitution was an
offer to one student who left the university without completing a degree following
disclosure of abuse to assist in the completion of the degree.
Condemning the condemner. Two additional strategies emerged during coding:
negative events misrepresented and condemning the condemner. The literature review
suggested these two strategies are forms of justification. However, BJU did not
acknowledge responsibility for their behavior when using either of these strategies;
therefore, they were not coded as justifications but were coded as separate direct
defensive tactics. For example, in one statement BJU focused on condemning
condemners. An open letter criticizing BJU for its response to the investigative results
was written by two abuse survivors who participated in a task force put together to aid in
the investigative process. In response to that letter, BJU remarked, “Each member of the
task force signed a confidentiality agreement stating they would not disclose any
deliberations or information from the task force meeting." This perhaps suggests the letter
should not be given any consideration.
Boasting. Boasting was the primary indirect assertive tactic used by BJU. Blaring,
burnishing, and blasting were also used in one or two instances. Boasting focuses on the
organization’s connection to another favorable organization. BJU used this particular
tactic to highlight a positive connection to Diane Langberg, who would have been viewed
favorably by the public due to her status as board member of GRACE and her expertise
in trauma and sexual abuse. They also used boasting to compare themselves to other
higher education officials who were giving sexual abuse and assault attention, to connect
113
themselves to an external attorney who reviewed their files did not find any instances
where the university failed to comply with reporting obligations, and to draw attention to
reviewers who found no evidence that the university protected any perpetrators or failed
to comply with its reporting obligations.
Burying. Burying was the primary indirect defensive tactic used by BJU.
Blurring, boosting, and belittling were also used in one or two instances. Burying
obscures, denies, or conceals the organization’s connection to an unfavorable other. BJU
used burying to obscure its connection with Chuck Phelps. Phelps was a pastor and
member of the Board of Trustees at BJU when a nation-wide story broke in November
2011 of accusations that Phelps covered-up child sexual abuse at his church. BJU did not
remove Phelps from their board until an online campaign led to his resignation in
December 2011. In that same month, BJU announced that it was putting together a
committee to review their sexual abuse policies and would hire an independent
ombudsman to investigate complaints from individuals. They contracted with GRACE in
November 2012. However, they repeatedly claimed that their efforts were solely
influenced by a desire to be a role model for other organizations and that the investigation
was not connected to any negative event:
“As I said earlier, we did not initiate the investigation in response to any incident
or known pattern of problem.”
“It was not undertaken in response to a specific incident or issue.”
“In November 2012, after consulting with the executive committee of the Board
of Trustees, BJU contracted with GRACE to undertake the comprehensive,
independent review. While we were unaware of any outstanding issues, BJU
initiated this review to achieve two primary objectives . . .”
“We didn’t do this because anybody charged us with anything.”

114
However, in a conversation with investigators, Bob Jones III acknowledged the
connection to Chuck Phelps and that perhaps there were incidents that weren’t handled
properly:
“But I know you are aware of the situation with Chuck Phelps’ church and Chuck
Phelps was on the board. When that all came out in November [2011], that made
us look at our policies. We put together a task board on the board to help look at
our policies, talk to people, find out what the best practices are currently. Then,
that committee came away suggesting that we find an ombudsman to look back in
the past to see if we had underserved.”
“Did a case fall through the cracks? Maybe so.”
These excerpts suggest that BJU utilized the strategy of burying to omit its connection to
Chuck Phelps and possible other negative events when giving a reason for its decision to
conduct a review of its policies and invite an investigation.
Sovereign Grace Ministries. A total of 139,589 words contained in written and
verbal files relevant to the response of Sovereign Grace Ministries to a negative event
were read as part of the data collection phase. In addition to these files, this researcher
also read lawsuit documents to gather background information regarding the negative
event. 124 units of analysis were identified and coded for OIM tactics. Three different
stakeholder types were identified as targets of the strategies: public, media, and church
members.
Crosstabulations suggested that prosocial behavior was the primary impression
management strategy (𝑛 = 46) emerging from SGM’s messages. Ingratiation occurred 15
times, 12 of which were coded as opinion conformity and three of which were coded as
flattery. Burnishing was identified 11 times, followed by organizational handicapping
(10), negative events misrepresented (9), boasting (7), excuse (6) comprised of denial of
agency (4) and denial of intention (2), supplication (4), references to rational practices
115
(2), condemning the condemner (2), denial of victim (1), references to normative
practices (1), blasting (1), and belittling (1).
SGM utilized a total of 16 different strategies spread across 124 units of analysis.
SGM’s primary efforts focused on the defensive strategy of prosocial behavior. This
tactic comprised 37.7% of all strategies used. The assertive tactic of ingratiation was the
second most-used tactic. OIM tactics that did not appear in any content include apology,
restitution, intimidation, exemplification, denial of volition, denial of injury, comparison
with industry practices, blaring, burying, blurring, and boosting. Table 3 displays a
crosstabulation of the OIM strategies used by SGM.
Table 3
Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by SGM
Church
Members Media Public Total
Ingratiation 8 7 15
Flattery 3 3
Opinion
5 7 12
Conformity
Promotion
Intimidation 0
Exemplification 0
Supplication 2 2 4
Excuse 6 6
Denial of
2 2
Intention
Denial of Volition 0
Denial of Agency 4 4
Justification 1 1
Denial of Injury 0
Denial of Victim 1 1
Condemning the
2 2
Condemner
116
Table 3–Continued. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies

Used by SGM
Church
Members Media Public Total
Negative Events
2 2 5 9
Misrepresented
Organizational
10 10
Handicapping
Apology 0
Restitution 0
Comparison with
0
Industry Practices
References to
Normative 1 1
Practices
References to
2 2
Rational Practices
Prosocial Behavior 12 4 30 46
Boasting 2 5 7
Blaring 0
Burnishing 11
Blasting 1 1
Burying 0
Blurring 0
Boosting 0
Belittling 1 1
Prosocial behavior. The tactic of prosocial behavior was identified in 46
statements. The statements were primarily focused on SGM’s condemnation of child
sexual abuse; concern for victims; commitment to protect children through training,
policies, and procedures; full respect for civil authorities; their prioritization of victims
over reputation; and a desire for wrongs to be exposed and for justice and truth to prevail:
“Sovereign Grace Ministries takes seriously the Biblical commands to pursue the
protection and well-being of all people, especially the most vulnerable in its
midst, little children.”
117
“We grieve deeply for any child who has been a victim of abuse. We want to
minister the love, grace and healing of God to any who have suffered this horrific
act.”
“SGM also encourages the establishment of robust child protection policies and
procedures based on best practices.”
“Child sexual abuse is reprehensible in any circumstance, and a violation of

fundamental human dignity.”
“SGM encourages pastors from its associated churches to minister the love, grace,
and healing of God to any who have suffered this horrific act.”
“We take seriously the biblical commands to pursue the protection and well-being
of all people – especially children, who are precious gifts given by the Lord and
the most vulnerable among us. These biblical commands include fully respecting
civil authority to help restrain evil and promote righteousness as Romans 13
instructs us.”
“SGM also encourages the establishment of robust child protection policies and
procedures based on best practices.”
“The pastors and churches in Sovereign Grace care deeply about protecting
children from abuse and caring for the victims of abuse.”
“We also encourage our churches to report abuse or allegations of abuse and to
cooperate with civil authorities.”
“We not only believe that child sexual abuse is wrong, we want our churches to
be a place where survivors of abuse can find the help and hope offered in the
gospel of Jesus Christ.”
“Sexual abuse is a heinous sin which causes harm to all victims of abuse and their
families. Therefore it is right that we grieve with them, do all we can to care for
them, and pray that God would grant them the comfort and hope found in the
gospel of Jesus Christ.”
“But regardless of the public discourse, we are strongly committed to ensuring a

safe environment for the children in our churches.”
“I’m personally grateful that Sovereign Grace churches have taken the protection
of children and care for victims seriously for many years.”
“All church leaders today should have a heightened awareness of the steps they
can take to create safe environments including the reporting of abuse and
cooperating with civil authorities to prosecute any abuser. We continue to
evaluate how we can grow in these areas.”
118
“Sovereign Grace Churches exist because of Jesus Christ and our passion is to
make Him known. Our collective efforts to provide safety for our children is not a
redefinition of our gospel mission, but a part of demonstrating Christ’s love to our
children and keeping our witness before a watching world.”
“I am deeply grieved for those who suffered abuse while part of Covenant Life
Church, as well as those beyond the church who were abused—and I continue to
pray for justice to be served on their behalf and for God’s healing grace in their
lives.”
“We are very committed to involving the authorities. Our biggest concern is not
our reputation or what anyone thinks of us, it’s caring for kids well.”
“We also know that it is possible for people to be wrongly accused, and so we
pray that God will protect anyone from inaccurate or distorted or false
accusations.”
“If wrong has been done, we want that to be revealed and for there to be
appropriate accountability.”
“We want justice and truth to prevail—whether this indicts past actions or
vindicates them.”
“We are sickened by the thought of such abuse—sexual abuse in any form is evil
and unconscionable. We are grieved by these allegations.”
Ingratiation. The tactic of ingratiation was used 15 times, 12 in the form of
opinion conformity and three in the form of flattery. Opinion conformity tactics were
seen in statements that suggested SGM sided with the victims:
“We ask that you please join us in praying that God guides and leads all of us in
these challenging circumstances, ministering His grace, comfort and peace to all
who are affected by this situation, and that His truth would prevail.”
“Our hope and prayer is that Christ’s healing and health will come to all parties
involved in this matter and that justice and righteousness will prevail for all.”
“We side with the victims.”
“. . . In this room he has 10,000 friends. Let's look forward to hearing the Word of
God from our friend C.J. Mahaney.”
119
Flattery was used three times and was seen in statements to church members
praising them for their patience, support, steadfastness, and faithfulness in the midst of an
aggressive lawsuit:
“Over the past 14 months I have traveled to 31 of our churches and spoken with
many members and leaders. There isn’t a group of people in the world with whom
I would rather labor in advancing the gospel than you.”
“I want to thank you for the patience and support you have shown to your local
churches and to Sovereign Grace during the last two years.”
“In the midst of an aggressive lawsuit you have faithfully served and prayed to
keep your local churches strong and by extension you have strengthened many
others. So thank you for your ‘labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord
Jesus Christ’ (1 Thessalonians 1:3).”
Burnishing. Burnishing is an indirect assertive tactic that enhances the positive
features of a favorable other. If the organization views their connection to another
organization or individual as positive, then they may enhance the public’s impression of
that other by drawing attention to their positive characteristics. Nine of the 11 excerpts
coded as burnishing were from an introduction of C.J. Mahaney given by Albert Mohler
at an evangelical conference. Mohler alluded to the scandal surrounding Mahaney and
then presented him as blessed by God, a lover of Christ and the gospel, joyful, “steadfast”
and “immovable,” consistent, kind, a model of endurance in the “face of an incredible
trial,” and a man of “personal integrity” who continues to exercise “vast” and “massive”
influence for good:
“We are profoundly thankful for C. J. as friend, and we are equally thankful for
the vast influence for good he has been among so many Gospel-minded people.”
“We have stood beside our friend, C. J. Mahaney, and we can speak to his
personal integrity.”
“C.J. is one man whose joy is in Christ, whose joy is in the gospel, and a man
through whom joy is so very, very evident.”
120
“I have never heard C.J. Mahaney say anything unkind about anyone. And that
has been a great gift to me in friendship.”
“He has modeled endurance. It'd be very easy to get up here and say, ‘C.J.
Mahaney is going to speak for us,’ But I think faithfulness in my responsibility
this afternoon in introducing him is to say that we know he has demonstrated
endurance in the face of an incredible trial. And he has been a model of endurance
for us.”
“C.J.'s preaching the same gospel he has always preached. Preaching the Scripture
in season and out of season with remarkable consistency over time and space as
his ministry moved from Maryland to here to Louisville, Kentucky where he is
the pastor of Sovereign Grace Church, continuing to exert massive influence
through the reaches of Sovereign Grace Ministries.”
“C.J. has been since the very first moment I met him an encourager and for that
I'm incredibly thankful. I have never left a conversation with C.J. discouraged.
We sometimes, as friends do, have to talk about things that are in themselves
discouraging because sometimes the world around us presents us things that are
discouraging but he's never been less than encouraging.”
“What I know is that C.J. loves Christ, loves the Gospel.”
Organizational promotion. Organizational promotion, an OIM tactic that
highlights the organization’s values, accomplishments, and nobility, was observed in 10
statements. SGM used organizational promotion to highlight their trust in God,
commitment to integrity and faithfulness, and their expectations on pastors to be above
reproach:
“SGM is committed to integrity and faithfulness in pastoral care, as are the

pastors of local congregations.”
“We want you to know our commitment is to do what is right before the Lord
throughout this process.”
“While a response to allegations is necessary, our priorities would be out of sorts

if we were only concerned with vindicating ourselves in the public arena.”
“We have never made a public comment with regard to claims and counter-claims
in a civil lawsuit, and we will not violate that principle now.”
121
“Those who minister in the name of the Lord Christ bear an inescapable duty to
live and to minister in a way that is above reproach. Those who teach, reminds
James, will face a stricter judgment. [James 3:1] May everything we do,
everything we teach, and all that we are be measured against that standard.”
“Still, my trust remains in the Lord, who comforts the brokenhearted and
promises in his justice and in his time to right every wrong.”
Organizational handicapping. Organizational handicapping consists of efforts by
the organization to make success appear unlikely in order to provide a ready-made excuse
for failure. By suggesting that the organization is handicapped in some way, the
organization can then use that perception as an excuse for its failure to behave in a certain
way. In this particular case, SGM and its leaders used organizational handicapping in
describing the reasons for not speaking publicly about allegations of sexual abuse:
“SGM is not in a position to comment on the specific allegations at this time, but
we are beginning a careful legal review of each allegation.”
“To comment on such claims is irresponsible, since no one apart from the court
and the parties directly involved has any ability to evaluate the claims presented.”
“Claims presented in a civil lawsuit seeking financial compensation are beyond

the ability of the public to render judgment.”
“We can make no judgment as to the truthfulness of the horrifying charges of

sexual abuse made against some individuals who have been connected, in some
way, to Sovereign Grace Ministries and its churches.”
“For now, the simple and extraordinarily unsatisfying reality—for myself and
others—is that in the face of an ongoing civil lawsuit, I simply cannot speak
publicly to the specifics of these events.”
“A Maryland judge’s recent action to dismiss a lawsuit against Sovereign Grace

Ministries offers us the first opportunity, and responsibility, to speak to this issue.
We could not speak to the issues involved so long as they were raised only in the
context of an action in the civil courts.”
122
Negative events misrepresented. The sixth most frequently used tactic was the
defensive strategy of negative events misrepresented in which an organization claims
details of an event are being taken out of context, misconstrued, or fabricated:
“This recent complaint makes broad allegations that SGM pastors were negligent
in providing spiritual counsel and pastoral care in situations involving persons
who had previously suffered child sexual abuse.”
“Upon initial review it appears the complaint contains a number of untrue or

misleading allegations, as well as considerable mischaracterizations of intent.
This complaint makes broad allegations that SGM pastors were negligent,
resulting in errors and omissions in pastoral counseling and spiritual care, which
was voluntarily sought and provided years ago to some families of child abuse
victims.”
“A Christian leader, charged with any credible, serious, and direct wrongdoing,
would usually be well advised to step down from public ministry. We believe this
lawsuit failed that test.”
“Even with those constraints, however, let me be clear about this: I have never
conspired to protect a child predator, and I also deny all the claims made against
me in the civil suit.”
“Sovereign Grace continues to deny all allegations of conspiracy and cover-up of

abuse made against us in this civil suit.”
“There has never been a policy like that.”
“There were allegations made in the civil suit against current pastors of Sovereign
Grace churches, namely John Loftness, Gary Ricucci, and C.J. Mahaney. I want
to be clear regarding these men: We believe these allegations are not true.”
“The specific allegations made against Sovereign Grace in this suit were those of
conspiracy claiming that we covered up abuse. Let me be clear that we deny—in
the strongest terms possible—that any Sovereign Grace leaders conspired to cover
up abuse as alleged in this lawsuit.”
Denial of agency. Excuses and justifications were used on just a few occasions,
primarily in the form of denial of agency tactics. Statements suggested that child abuse
did not occur on any SGM property or at any church associated with SGM and was not
committed by any employee, staff, current pastor, or former pastor of SGM or any church
123
associated with SGM. In other words, SGM acknowledged harm was done but suggested
they did not commit the harm themselves and thus should not be held responsible.
Boasting. Boasting was also a significant indirect assertive strategy used by
SGM. It was seen in statements from C.J. Mahaney that suggested many favorable others
were urging him to respond publicly and address accusations made against him, that his
trust was in the Lord who comforts the brokenhearted and promises justice, and that he
was connected to favorable others but that none of them could speak publicly in the face
of an ongoing lawsuit, a reality he described as “extraordinarily unsatisfying.” Boasting
was also observed in messages that connected the decision to side with SGM pastors with
the judgements of the entire leadership team, the elders, and key national leaders.
Mars Hill Church. A total of 67,697 words contained in written and verbal files
relevant to the response of Mars Hill Church to a negative event were read as part of the
data collection phase. Two hundred ninety units of analysis were identified and coded for
OIM tactics. Four different stakeholder types were identified as targets of the strategies:
public, media, church members, and church leaders.
Crosstabulations suggested that organizational promotion (48 occurrences) was
the primary OIM strategy emerging from MHC’s messages. Ingratiation occurred 45
times, 25 of which were coded as compliments and 20 of which were coded as opinion
conformity. Boasting was identified 42 times, followed by supplication (33), prosocial
behavior (26), apology (23), excuse (23: 18 of which were coded denial of volition and 3
of which were coded denial of intention), burnishing (12), condemning the condemner
(11), negative events misrepresented (9), references to historical practices (7),
organizational handicapping (3), blaring (3), blasting (2), blurring (2), boosting (1).
124
MHC and its leaders utilized a total of 16 different strategies spread across 290
units of analysis. MHC’s primary efforts focused on the assertive strategy of
organizational promotion. The assertive tactic of ingratiation was the second most-used
tactic. OIM tactics that did not appear in any content include burying, belittling, denial of
agency, justification, exemplification, comparison with industry practices, favor-
rendering, references to normative practices, references to rational practices, and
restitution. Table 4 displays a crosstabulation of the OIM strategies used by MHC.
Table 4
Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by MHC
Church Church
Leaders Members Media Public Total
Ingratiation 2 43 45
Flattery 2 23 25
Opinion
20 20
Conformity
Promotion
Intimidation 0
Exemplification 0
Supplication 1 32 33
Excuse 24 24
Denial of
3 3
Intention
Denial of Volition 21 21
Denial of Agency 0
Justification 0
Denial of Injury 0
Denial of Victim 0
Condemning the
3 8 11
Condemner
Negative Events
3 4 1 1 9
Misrepresented
Organizational
3 3
Handicapping
125
Table 4–Continued. Crosstabulation of OIM Strategies Used by MHC
Church Church
Leaders Members Media Public Total
Apology 23 23
Restitution 0
References to
Historical 6 1 7
Practices
Comparison with
0
Industry Practices
References to
Normative 0
Practices
References to
0
Rational Practices
Prosocial Behavior 4 22 26
Boasting 41 1 42
Blaring 3 3
Burnishing 1 11 12
Blasting 2 2
Burying 0
Blurring 2 2
Boosting 1 1
Belittling 0
Organizational promotion. The OIM direct assertive tactic of organizational
promotion is used to highlight the organization’s positive characteristics,
accomplishments, and nobility. This tactic was observed more than any other tactic.
Messages focused on MHC’s commitment to change, confidence in greater church
health, humility, repentance, accountability, transparency, godliness, caution, seriousness,
impartiality, skill, unity, past successes, and commitment to noble values:
“For those of you who have been around for a while, it is amazing for us to see all
that Jesus has done. People often ask if our church today resembles what I had
originally planned. Not even close. The smallest location of a Mars Hill Church is
bigger than what my total vision was for the whole church when we started.”
126
“When a small group of us started what would become Mars Hill Church in 1996,
we could not have dreamed it would be what it is today. Thousands upon
thousands of people have become Christians as the gospel of Jesus Christ has
proven powerful over and over. Every day, it seems, I hear of someone whose life
has been transformed by the power of the Word of God taught in this place and
modeled by so many who call this their church home.”
“Throughout this difficult season, much is coming to light about our church that
we believe Jesus wants to change . . . Godliness and health from the ground-up is
our aim. Given some time, and with much prayer and a commitment to put these
goals into practice, we will see our church culture transform from what it has
been, into a genuine culture of love.”
“What Jesus has done has far exceeded even what I was praying for or hoping for
or dreaming of and particularly lately this season we’ve been in has just caused
me to be very grateful to Jesus for his kindness and part of this kindness is the
people of Mars Hill Church.”
“As the Board of Elders continue to glean the lessons learned during this season,
we are confident this will lead to greater church health through deep cultural
change.”
“Behind the scenes, there is progress being made to help our church become
godly and healthy.”
“We are determined to honor the past work that Jesus has done through this
church and those that have labored with us, while correcting and setting a new
course for the future where he can be most glorified as we move ourselves out of
the way.”
“Mars Hill Church and Pastor Mark Driscoll have always been passionate about
teaching the Bible and spreading the gospel by making disciples and planting
churches. Immense growth in the size and complexity of the church has
highlighted areas for, and has resulted in, several improvements.”
“While we reiterate that the overwhelming majority of our church discipline cases
are healthy and restorative, there are certainly times where things don’t go as they
should—both from our end and from the end of those who are in the process.”
“Here’s the bottom line: we love people.”
Ingratiation. Ingratiation is a direct assertive tactic used to convey an image of
likeability, favor, and trust. Two forms of ingratiation were identified in the content:
flattery and opinion conformity. Flattery is a tactic used to make targets feel good about
127
themselves, which in turn may cause them to view the spokesperson in a favorable light.
Flattery centered around compliments and expressions of love towards church members
and leaders:
“Also, I continue to find great joy in teaching the Bible every week to people I
have grown to love with a father’s affection.”
“I have received a great deal of love and encouragement from you for more than
17 years. I genuinely appreciate every person who prays for my family and me.”
“I really love our church, and I see where it was unhealthy, where it has gotten
healthier, and where we can continue in that path. I am very encouraged by where
we are and where we are going.”
“Some of the most loving, generous, resilient people that any pastor has had the
joy of leading and loving, and so it just is quite a miracle to be on this train with
you and I’m exceedingly grateful for Jesus’ grace to me, and to us, and you are
part of that grace.”
“I love you, I love teaching the Bible. In all of this, I’m just more deeply grateful
for... for the people who allow me to teach them God’s word. The fact that I get to
open the book that God wrote, and to instruct the people that God loves is just a
tremendous honor. And in all of this, it’s just, it’s been a very encouraging and
sobering time, to just be grateful for you, and those who allow me to teach them
the Bible.”
“While I have been away, God has placed an increasing thankfulness in me for
the people of Mars Hill.”
“I want to thank those who have come directly to an Elder, lead pastor or me to
tell us of an offense they are carrying. This allows us to deal with it head-on
between the two affected parties, rather than in a court of public opinion and
public media. I believe God is honored by this approach—the approach He
prescribed for us in Matthew 18 and other Scriptures.”
“Thank you for being a wonderful church family.”
“We love you, Mars Hill, and we are here to love, serve, and care for you. At the
end of the day, our only hope is in Jesus, and our only job is to point you to
Jesus.”
“Thank you for your support and service, as many have learned about Jesus and
countless lives have been changed by Jesus’ work through you.”
128
Opinion conformity is an ingratiating tactic used to suggest that the actor and the
target possess shared values, understandings, or opinions. Opinion conformity focused on
efforts to reconcile with those who were accusing MHC of abusing authority and
expressions of the church’s desire to be united with the people in their attempts to change
the culture:
“Our ‘team’ is Jesus, not one group of elders or another. We must control our
tongues, including our ‘digital/online’ tongues. “I said, ‘I will guard my ways,
that I may not sin with my tongue; I will guard my mouth with a muzzle, so long
as the wicked are in my presence’” (Ps. 39:1). Scripture has many warnings about
engaging controversies, quarrels and other’s disagreements because of the intense
hurt that comes for all those involved.”
“I realize the vast majority of you just want to come to church and hear God’s
Word taught. You want to feed your families spiritually just as you feed them
physically, and Mars Hill should be a safe place to do just that. As your pastor, I
want that for you more than anything. All of our lead pastors want that for those
under their care as well.”
“As we work towards a new future together in service to Jesus, we are still called
to be the people of God in every arena of life. This means that it will be more
important than ever that each one of us that calls Mars Hill Church home
continues to operate in faithfulness through serving God’s people, giving
generously to God’s work, and loving one another well.”
“We wish to move forward together knowing that we are a broken and repentant
church in need of a forgiveness and restoration that only Jesus provides.”
“Our desire is for reconciliation between us and you. This won’t mean we’ll
always see eye to eye, but can and should talk face to face in a spirit of humility
and grace. Please submit requests by phone or email so we can begin this process.
We offer this all as a means of opening up a line of reconciliation in the hopes of
making it as easy for you as possible.”
“Our response to human opposition is to stand firm in Christ, hold strong to our
biblical convictions, and give grace. We were all once enemies of God, but Jesus
died for our sin and rose from the grave to forgive us, made us new, and brought
us into the family of God. We represent Jesus and have an opportunity with our
words and actions to display his love, grace, and mercy.”
“We want to lead you into the future in a way that displays more grace, more love
as we speak the truth to each of you. If there are people that I have offended in
129
ways I have pastored this church, I would welcome that you come to me and
speak with me to allow me the opportunity to reconcile with you.”
“And I am sorry for the hurting that some of you are feeling, and by God’s grace
we will love one another well as a family and, and, and the Lord Jesus will have a
great future for us together.”
Boasting. Boasting is an indirect assertive tactic that proclaims a positive
connection or comparison to another person, organization, object, or content that others
view favorably. Boasting was a primary tactic used by MHC. MHC used the tactic to
repeatedly proclaim a positive link to Jesus, who it consistently referred to as its senior
pastor. MHC also highlighted the support it received from the elders, external
accountability board, and church leaders:
“Now is the time to move on and consider what God is calling us to next as a
church as we participate in Jesus’ mission to make disciples in His name. Today
begins a new chapter in the history of our church which has proceeded in one
direction under one leadership for many years now, but I want you to understand
this, God is our Father. That does not change. Jesus is the chief shepherd of the
church and that has not changed.”
“Please pray for us. Jesus is our Senior Pastor. He loves you dearly and we as
your elders desire to serve you better. We need his gospel and the empowering
presence of the Holy Spirit to become Jesus' faithful under shepherds.”
“Don’t be surprised by opposition. Jesus said in John 15:18, ‘If the world hates
you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.’ As Christians, we are going to
receive opposition for following Jesus and believing every word of the Bible as
God’s truth. Opposition should not surprise us as our Savior was hated and
condemned. Opposition is part of the Christian life.”
“I have often said that I was too new in the faith and unprepared when we started
this church, which makes all that Jesus has done all the more miraculous.”
“And lastly, in all of this, there is one scripture that, that really I’ve been
meditating on a lot, and it’s Ecclesiastes 7:8. Ecclesiastes chapter 7 verse 8 says,
‘The end of the matter is better than the beginning, and patience is better than
pride.’ And for me it’s sort of been a guiding verse, principally, where whatever
the outcome might be, it’ll be bad if, if in this season we, starting with me, have
impatience or pride. And so, I am praying against those things and seeking
patience and humility by the grace of God.”
130
“In the last year or two, I have been deeply convicted by God that my angry-
young-prophet days are over, to be replaced by a helpful, Bible-teaching spiritual
father.”
“Lastly, if God would lead you to pray for me, the Scripture he has impressed
upon me this past year or two is 1 Corinthians 4:15: ‘For though you have
countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your
father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.’”
“The gospel is powerfully at work in me, your pastor, thanks to the faithfulness of
our Senior Pastor Jesus Christ, and the best thing for us each to do is look to Him
and point others to Him.”
“To be clear, these are decisions I have come to with our Senior Pastor Jesus
Christ. I believe this is what He is asking of me, and so I want to obey Him.”
Supplication. Supplication tactics are employed by the organization to portray an
image of dependency and vulnerability for the purpose of acquiring help, favor, or
sympathy from others. Supplication was used repeatedly by MHC in attempts to solicit
prayers, financial support, and commitment from church members. Messages asked
members to be patient and to pray for their leaders. Some statements suggested the
church was facing opposition and asked for prayers for strength and endurance. One
leader brought attention to his hurt, the demands of the church on his time and family,
and his poor health.
“To our critics, we’d humbly ask you to imagine how complicated situations such
as this are for us. When someone says they have a issue with us, they get to tell
the media their side of the story. If we tell the other side of the story, we risk
breaching laws and exposing people—both the people in the discipline process
and the people they’ve sinned against—to public backlash.”
“Yeah, lastly, many of you have asked myself and other leaders of the church,
‘How can we be in prayer?’ and I genuinely appreciate that. I would say, pray for
the leaders in your local churches, they’re dealing with things that, that I’m not
dealing with and there are some things in this season that are just, they’re just,
they’re strange . . . they’re just trying to love the people well but sometimes the
things they’re dealing with are just so strange and unexpected that, for them it can
be difficult if not discouraging and so, so as they’re heavy-hearted, I’m heavy-
hearted for them and would appreciate your prayers for them.”
131
“We don’t always get it right. But, in this instance we ask that you would pray for
your leaders, love your city, and wait until we all stand before Jesus to get the
facts and a clear verdict.”
Supplication tactics were also seen in statements that drew attention to the hurts
experienced by the leadership:
“I’ve had some people come up and say, you know, ‘Pastor Mark, how are you
doing in this season?’ and I say ‘Well, I’m hurting,’ and they say ‘Well, a lot of us
are hurting right now’ so please join me in prayer that for those who are hurting in
the church that this summer in particular would be a season of healing for those
who are hurting. And for me, if God would, you know, bring me to mind, in all of
this, I just really want to, as much as I’m able, lead our people and our leaders to
do what is Godly. And this is just a real deep desire in my heart. I, I try not to lead
out of fear - some days are easier than others.”
“And so everybody got to speculate for years what the motive was, ‘oh he’s
power hungry, he’s controlling, he wants to take over, he doesn’t love people, you
know he’s just a bully.’ And no, it’s actually he’s broken and his wife is hurting
and the church is gonna probably literally kill him or put him in the hospital and
his wife needs him right now, so he’s gotta make some adjustments. So, you
know, by the grace of God, we weathered that storm.”
“Storm clouds seem to be whirling around me more than ever in recent months
and I have given much thought and sought much counsel as to why that is and
what to do about it. The current climate is not healthy for me or for this church.
(In fact, it would not be healthy for any church.)”
“God has broken me many times in recent years by showing me where I have
fallen short, and while my journey, at age 43, is far from over, I believe He has
brought me a long way from some days I am not very proud of, and is making me
more like Him every day.”
The strategy of supplication was observed in statements that asked people to exercise
patience:
“Please be patient and give this process a chance to work. We are already hard at
work and believe that this is a sound biblical process that requires you to patiently
and prayerfully wait for our committee’s recommendations.”
“We would ask for patience as we now make plans for the first transition of
pastoral leadership in the history of Mars Hill Church.”
132
“We need your patience and prayers as we seek to live out our commitment to
these areas of significant change in our church.”
Tactics of supplication were also indicated in calls for the people to give of their money,
time, and service as expressions of support:
“As we work towards a new future together in service to Jesus, we are still called
to be the people of God in every arena of life. This means that it will be more
important than ever that each one of us that calls Mars Hill Church home
continues to operate in faithfulness through serving God’s people, giving
generously to God’s work, and loving one another well.”
“Continue to serve, give, and love one another in Jesus name and for his sake.
Every person, every effort, every dollar invested now could be what helps us
become a more godly and loving church in the future. Don’t faint. Don’t bolt.
Don’t become weary in doing good. Jesus will prevail.”
“Please pray for your church as we make some tough, but needed, financial
decisions. If you consider Mars Hill your church home, now is the time to pray,
serve, and give. As we head into the fall, we need your support more than ever,
and we are trusting Jesus to continue his good work through you and Mars Hill
Church.”
“It is your continued support that is needed now more than ever. While we were
able to end the fiscal year strong, giving and attendance have declined
significantly since January. Specifically, we have seen a substantial decrease in
tithes and offerings these past two months, due to the increase in negative media
attention surrounding our church.”
Prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior was the fourth most used tactic. It is a
direct defensive OIM tactic that highlights the organization’s involvement in prosocial
actions in an attempt to atone for mistakes and convince stakeholders and/or the public
that the organization merits a positive image. Prosocial behavior tactics spotlighted
MHC’s work to evangelize non-Christians and care for its church members. Messages
brought attention to the number of lives changed by its work, the churches it planted, its
commitment to teaching its people the Bible, and its investment in young leaders:
133
“Obviously, we’d rather take the hits as a church than expose our members to the
media and potentially break the law by divulging private information shared in a
counseling session by a victim.”
“My understanding of the ResultSource marketing strategy was to maximize book

sales, so that we could reach more people with the message and help grow our
church.”
“Starting this fall, I will also be teaching at Corban University and Western
Seminary in Bellevue to invest in young leaders. For a season, I want to pull back
from many things in order for us to focus on the most important things: glorifying
Jesus by making disciples and planting churches as a healthy, loving, and unified
church, with our hands on the Bible and our eyes on Jesus.”
“Part of God’s calling, I believe, on my life is to lead men, and he’s helping me
learn how to do that better. And I want to grow in that, and by God’s grace, I’m
learning a lot especially in this season and, and that’s why I’m looking forward to
some of these relational reconciliation meetings, so that I can, I can love better
and mend some of those relationships.”
“These are serious times we are living in and people all around us are dying every
hour without Jesus. It is this reality that drives me and motivates me to keep
learning God’s Word, and teaching God’s Word to His people so that together, we
can continue to reach people with the saving grace and love and mercy of Jesus. I
hope that regardless of whatever else is swirling around us, we never lose this
perspective on why Mars Hill exists in the first place - Jesus loves people and
people need Jesus.”
“We are for Jesus. We are for sinners (like us) receiving God’s grace and
salvation. We are for people knowing and believing the Bible. We are for real,
authentic life change. We are for forgiveness. We are for reconciliation. We are
for restoration. And we are for redemption.”
“I realize the vast majority of you just want to come to church and hear God’s
Word taught. You want to feed your families spiritually just as you feed them
physically, and Mars Hill should be a safe place to do just that. As your pastor, I
want that for you more than anything. All of our lead pastors want that for those
under their care as well.”
Excuse. The defensive OIM strategy of excuse is used when an organization
wants to negate responsibility for an event (Caillouet, 1991). It seeks to avoid a situation
in which stakeholders view the organization as culpable for a negative event. Excuses can
take various forms. In the case of MHC, denial of volition was the form of excuse most
134
often observed. Organizations make statements that suggest that they could not control
nor be expected to control the negative event (Tedeschi & Reiss, 1981). The implication
is that the organization is experiencing the negative event irrespective of organizational
practices or decisions. The intended result is that the audience will perceive the event as a
phenomenon that no organization would reasonably be expected to take responsibility
for. This is demonstrated in the following excerpts in which attention is brought to a lack
of ability, maturity, health, and understanding:
“The pressure and pace has increased every year since I started in 1996. I don’t
want to be burned out or angry, and I want to become more like Jesus every year.”
“For years, I felt a joy in teaching the Bible and love for the people, but frankly
was overwhelmed on how to organize and lead all that was happening.”
“I felt the crushing weight of responsibility but did not know what to do, and I
lacked the abilities to figure it out.”
“A couple of things combined at that season as well, overwork and stress and
everything else. I fatigued my adrenal glands, I was in a bad place health-wise,
was not sleeping. It was a pretty dark time for me . . .”
“In my worst moments, I was angry in a sinful way. For those occasions, I am
sorry. As I’ve expressed in several sermons, I needed to mature as a leader, and
we needed to mature as a church.”
“I was frustrated at my shortcomings, but needed help from people who were
more experienced and mature.”
“I have often said that I was too new in the faith and unprepared when we started
this church, which makes all that Jesus has done all the more miraculous.”
“Lately, the number of accusations, combined with their public nature, makes it
much more difficult to know how to respond appropriately. Indeed, many times
we have chosen not to respond at all, which probably raises even more questions
in some people’s minds, and I understand that.”
“During this season as well, I have been rather silent and there are some reasons
for that. First of all, we, including myself, needed to determine what exactly was
happening. If I’m real honest with you, at first it was just a little overwhelming
and a bit confusing.”
135
“As well, one of the things that has been... complex is the fact that a lot of the
people that we are dealing with in this season remain anonymous. And so we
don’t know how to reconcile, or how to work things out with, with people because
we’re not entirely sure who they are, and so that has, that has made things a little
more complex and difficult as well.”
“In addition, it’s been difficult to know how to communicate to the church,
because we’re one church in fifteen locations spread across five states, and so in
this season certain churches wanted a lot of information, other churches wanted
very little information, certain churches wanted very specific information, other
churches wanted very different information, and so some of our churches have
been greatly impacted and affected during this season, others to a lesser degree.
So how to communicate has been, has been difficult, how to serve each of the
locations most effectively.”
Twenty out of 23 excuses were coded as denial of volition. Messages suggested
that Driscoll lacked ability, maturity, good health, and understanding at the time of the
negative events. Three of the excuses were coded as denial of intention. One statement
claimed that the board of elders did not intend for Driscoll to resign. Messages from
Driscoll contended that his behavior was unintentional or accidental for two reasons: (1)
at the time of his misuses of authority his wife needed him more than the church and (2)
in an effort to be empathetic towards women and children he unintentionally failed to be
empathetic towards men.
Apology. The last tactic worth noting due to its frequency is apology. An apology
admits guilt and responsibility and will sometimes be included with a request for penalty
or an offer to make restitution. Apologies were seen in statements from Mark Driscoll,
the lead pastor of MHC, the board of elders, and an individual pastor and elder. Driscoll’s
apologies were observed in the following excerpts:
“Many have chosen to air their concerns online, and I apologize for any burden
this may have brought on you, and I will do my best to clarify a few things
without, I hope, being angry or defensive.”
136
“In my worst moments, I was angry in a sinful way. For those occasions, I am
sorry. As I’ve expressed in several sermons, I needed to mature as a leader, and
we needed to mature as a church.”
“And I am sorry for the hurting that some of you are feeling, and by God’s grace
we will love one another well as a family and, and, and the Lord Jesus will have a
great future for us together.”
“God is not honored by conflict, strife, disunity, arguing, slander, gossip or

anything else not consistent with the fruit of the Spirit, and I am deeply sorry for
the times I have not done my part to living peaceably with all men.”
“Some have challenged various aspects of my personality and leadership style,

and while some of these challenges seem unfair, I have no problem admitting I
am deserving of some of these criticisms based on my own past actions that I am
sorry for.”
“But I’m particularly sorry that any of my past actions or decisions have brought
distraction to the mission of Mars Hill Church, and therefore, to those who call
this their church home. Part of this is no doubt a function of the media age we live
in—anyone can write anything, anywhere, anytime. As a public figure, I
recognize and accept this, even if I don’t like it; for this is one of the paradoxes of
being a pastor in a media age—the same media channels that can be used to carry
a sermon to virtually anyone around the globe can also be used by anyone around
the globe to criticize, attack or slander. However, another part of it is simply my
fault and I will own it, confess it and move on from it as God continues to redeem
me. I will seek to resolve unresolved issues with others, and will seek to avoid
such conflict in the future; at least to the extent I have any control over it.”
“Finally, I want to say to our Mars Hill family—past and present, I’m very sorry.
I’m sorry for the times I have been angry, short, or insensitive. I’m sorry for
anything I’ve done to distract from our mission by inviting criticism, controversy
or negative media attention.”
Some of the apologies were observed in statements issued by the board of elders.
Initial apologies focused on the disunity of the leadership and the effect it had on the
church. Later apologies focused on the unhealthy culture that the leadership contributed
to:
“In a 2-year period ending in the fall of 2013, Mars Hill Church endured
significant turnover of key staff members that made many wonderful
contributions to the development of Mars Hill Church during their tenure. A
number of these staff transitions were acrimonious. Pastor Mark and the other
137
executive Elders own their part in any discord that could have been avoided with
a better process or a more patient interaction.
We are terribly sorry because this is incredibly distracting and harmful to the
cause of the gospel. Please forgive us for our division and lack of unity. We know
this hurts all of you deeply and we are eagerly working toward the unity that we
have in Jesus.”
“We realize that there are ways that we have led as elders in ways that have been
domineering, sometimes arrogant and sometimes boastful and at least for my part,
I want to say I deeply regret those sins and I ask for your forgiveness.”
“We ask for forgiveness from those who have been hurt by this church because of
the culture we contributed to. We wish to move forward together knowing that we
are a broken and repentant church in need of a forgiveness and restoration that
only Jesus provides.”
Apologies were also seen in an address given by one of the elders and pastors to
his church after Driscoll resigned. These apologies focused on specific sins and the effect
those sins had on the people:
“For example, if the leadership and ministry culture at Mars Hill has been marked
by arrogance (and it has), then I am coming to see how I have been marked by
that same arrogance, and how I was blind to it, both in others and in myself. I now
see how my own sin of arrogance within our arrogant culture therefore went
unrecognized and unchallenged. In saying this, I am in no way blaming my sin on
others or on the culture. On the contrary, my sin is my own sin which I freely
confess. That is what I am now seeing with painful clarity. The same is true with
the sin of domineering leadership. In fact, if you mix ministry arrogance together
with top-down domineering leadership along with idolatry of church growth and
numbers, then inevitably you create a ministry culture where many end up hurt,
burned out, feeling used. I see this now, and I see how I helped to build such a
culture. In fact, I am now beginning to see how my own idolatry of performance
and ministry ‘success’ played so well at Mars Hill. Again, I do not blame my sin
on others or our culture. Rather, I am now seeing how I contributed to the hurt of
faithful and trusting members, attenders and leaders. Please forgive me.”
“Sadly, I confess that I bought into this narrative in many ways and for too long. I
trusted our leadership and sincerely believed their words. I sincerely led others to
believe their words. Perhaps our leadership believed their own words, but this
consistent narrative over the years became woven into the core of the culture of
the church. It is profoundly dark and ugly. I see that now, but for a long time I
was blind to it. I am so sorry.”
138
“There are so many things I frankly did not see. Looking back prayerfully
however, I now realize there were also a few situations where I did see but did not
speak up or stand up when I should have. My silence in those situations was sinful
and cowardly. In our coercive culture of fear I gave in to fear of man. I am so
sorry. Please forgive me.”
“Through sins both of commission and omission at various times I have been
complicit.
I am deeply sorry that so many people have experienced profound hurt over the
years at Mars Hill. It breaks my heart that many continue to live with deep
emotional and spiritual wounds, even long after leaving the church. I also realize
that in my role as an elder, including as Lead Pastor at Shoreline, I share
responsibility and complicity in some of the ways you have been hurt,
disappointed, and sinned against at Mars Hill. For me this has been an ongoing
process in which the depth of conviction and realization of my own sin seems to
grow almost daily as does my sorrow over how people have been hurt.”
“Brothers and sisters, I humbly ask your forgiveness for my sin in my role as a
Mars Hill elder. I am deeply sorry for your suffering, and pray that Jesus will
grant emotional, spiritual, and relational healing.”
Negative events misrepresented with organizational handicapping. Negative
events misrepresented strategies were used to suggest that some accusations and
challenges were unfair and untrue. Suggestions were made that details being shared
online were filled with misinformation. At the same time, organizational handicapping
tactics were used to provide a ready-made excuse for not publicly commenting on the
accusations. MHC suggested it would be inappropriate to address the issues from the
pulpit because the pulpit is sacred and should be reserved for the teaching of the Bible.
MHC also stated that it would be unable to speak because of its need to be patient in its
investigation and because of agreements made between conflicting parties to not share
deliberations.
Burnishing and blaring. Burnishing was an indirect assertive tactic employed by
MHC. Messages of this type were used by the board of elders to polish the positive
139
characteristics of Driscoll, and were used by Driscoll to polish the positive attributes of
the board of elders, the external accountability board, and the church pastors. Blaring was
used by the board of elders to suggest that MHC was not like some churches who “take a
hard stance in the name of truth by fighting against those who oppose them.” Unlike
those churches, MHC proclaimed it would not lash out against anyone. Blaring appeared
in messages from Driscoll in which he stated that he was not like other celebrity pastors
and no longer like the angry young prophets from the OT but more like a spiritual father.
RQ1 summary. A total of 599 excerpts were coded during the coding phase.
There were 639 unique occurrences of OIM observed in the excerpts. Prosocial behavior
was the most frequently applied code, having been observed 109 times. Excuse was
indicated in 85 excerpts, 70 of which were coded as denial of volition. Organizational
promotion tactics were observed in 80 units of analysis, followed by ingratiation (77),
boasting (58), supplication (39), negative events misrepresented (32), burnishing (25),
apology (24), organizational handicapping (19), justification (16), condemning the
condemner (15), blaring (7), references to historical practices (7), burying (7), blasting
(5), exemplification (5), belittling (2), references to rational practices (2), boosting (2),
references to normative practices (1), comparison with industry practices (1), and
restitution (1). Intimidation was the only OIM tactic that was not observed in any content.
Research Question 2
This researcher conducted a QCA of content collected from three organizations:
Bob Jones University, Sovereign Grace Ministries, and Mars Hill Church. An analysis of
the data sought to answer the question: did the organizations use different impression
management strategies for different targets? If so, which strategies were used for
140
different targets? In this section, the data relevant to that question is displayed for each
organization.
Bob Jones University. BJU used different OIM strategies with different
stakeholders. Crosstabulations indicated that with investigators, the most frequently
occurring strategy was denial of volition (47), followed by negative events
misrepresented (13), prosocial behavior (9), denial of victim (8), organizational
promotion (4), boasting (3), burying (3), denial of intention (3), denial of agency (2),
organizational handicapping (2), exemplification (1), condemning the condemner (1),
blaring (1), burnishing (1), blasting (1), blurring (1), and belittling (1).
Crosstabulations indicated that with the public, the most frequently used strategy
was prosocial behavior (20), followed by organizational promotion (7), organizational
handicapping (4), boasting (4), ingratiation (2), exemplification (2), burying (2),
supplication (1), restitution (1), comparison with industry practices (1), blasting (1),
blurring (1), and boosting (1).
Crosstabulations indicated that with the student body, the most frequently used
strategy was organizational promotion (11), followed by prosocial behavior (7),
ingratiation (4), excuse (4), blaring (3), boasting (2), burying (2), exemplification (1),
supplication (1), negative events misrepresented (1), and blurring (1).
Of the stakeholders, the three groups addressed most frequently were
investigators, public, and student body. There were only seven strategies used when
addressing victims, three when addressing employees, two when addressing alumni, and
one when addressing the media. BJU used the strategy of ingratiation four times when
addressing victims, followed by apology (1), prosocial behavior (1), and burnishing (1).
141
Flattery, exemplification, and burnishing were each used once when addressing
employees. Ingratiation was the only strategy used when addressing alumni, and
condemning the condemner was the single strategy used when addressing the media.
BJU used the excuse tactic of denial of volition 47 times when speaking to
investigators, but only three times when speaking to other stakeholders. Negative events
misrepresented was observed in 13 statements directed at investigators compared to only
one statement when speaking to any of the other stakeholders. The following strategies
were only used when addressing investigators: denial of intention, denial of victim, and
belittling. The following strategies were not observed in any communication directed at
investigators but were observed in communication directed at other stakeholders:
ingratiation, supplication, and boosting.
BJU used similar tactics when speaking to the public and the student body.
Prosocial behavior and organizational promotion were the most frequently used tactics
when addressing the public or the student body. The following strategies were only
observed in statements addressed to the public: restitution, comparison with industry
practices, and boosting. However, all the strategies used when addressing the study body
were also observed in statements targeting other stakeholder types. Messages to the
student body were focused on giving assurances in the same way that a retail company
might assure its customers of the value of its products. Statements focused on promoting
the organization and highlighting its prosocial behaviors. Any references to negative
events suggested they were misrepresented, and connections to unfavorable others were
either buried or blurred.

142
Ingratiation was the only tactic used for five or more stakeholder types: public,
student body, victims, alumni, and employees. Prosocial behavior was used for four
different stakeholders: public, investigators, student body, and victims. Each of the other
tactics were used for three or fewer stakeholder types. With victims, alumni, and
employees, BJU tended to use flattery or opinion conformity. They also used ingratiating
tactics with the student body and with the public. However, it did not use any ingratiation
tactics when addressing investigators. When addressing investigators, BJU primarily
employed the excuse tactic of denial of volition. Meanwhile, denial of volition was not
used with other targets with the exception of three occurrences when addressing the
student body. BJU might have felt more comfortable acknowledging negative events,
even though they were excused, when speaking to investigators.
The media was the recipient of only one total message. This could be due to a
lack of media interest or perhaps BJU’s reluctance to speak to the media. When it did
address the media, its strategy focused on condemning the condemners.
Besides flattery and opinion conformity, victims were the recipients of an
apology, a prosocial behavior statement, and a message coded as burnishing. Flattery and
opinion conformity were the only strategies targeting alumni. Employees were also the
objects of flattery but also received burnishing messages that praised their president and
highlighted how BJU was a role model for other faith-based organizations to follow.
Figure 1 displays crosstabulations of OIM strategies used by stakeholders for the
six most used tactics: denial of volition, prosocial behavior, organizational promotion,
negative events misrepresented, ingratiation, and denial of victim. These tactics were
selected for significance, indicated by the gap in frequency between these and the rest of
143
the tactics. Figures 2 through 4 explore each individual stakeholder type. The frequency
of OIM tactics is reported for each stakeholder type.
Impression Management Strategies by Stakeholders (BJU)

50 47
45
40
35
30
25
20
20
15 13
11
8 9
10 7 7
3 44 4
5 100 2 21
0 000 00000 01000 0 000
0
Denial of Denial of Victim Pro-social Negative Events Ingratiation Organizational
Volition Behavior Misrepresented Promotion
Investigators Public Student Body Victims Alumni Employees
Figure 1. Impression management strategies by stakeholders (BJU).
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h P ubl i c (BJ U)

Public
20
7
4
2
2
1
Figure 2. OIM strategies used with public (BJU).

144
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h S t udent Body (BJ U)

Student Body
11
7
4
3
2
2
1
1
Figure 3. OIM strategies used with student body (BJU).
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h Medi a, Vi ct i m s, Al um ni , or

Em pl oyees (BJ U)
Media Victims Alumni Employees
4
2
1
INGRATIATION CONDEMING THE APOLOGY PRO-SOCIAL BURNISHING

CONDEMNER BEHAVIOR
Figure 4. OIM strategies used with media, victims, alumni, or employees (BJU).
145
Sovereign Grace Ministries. SGM primarily relied on the tactic of prosocial
behavior for each stakeholder type. Crosstabulations indicated that with the public, the
most frequently occurring strategy was prosocial behavior (30), followed by burnishing
(11), organizational handicapping (10), organizational promotion (8), ingratiation (7),
excuse (6), negative events misrepresented (5), boasting (5), supplication (2),
condemning the condemner (2), references to rational practices (2), justification (1),
references to normative practices (1), blasting (1), and belittling (1). The seven instances
of ingratiation were all in the form of opinion conformity. The six instances of excuse
included four uses of denial of agency and two uses of denial of intention. The single use
of justification was in the form of denial of victim.
Crosstabulations indicated that with church members, the most frequently used
strategy was also prosocial behavior (12), followed by ingratiation (8), organizational
promotion (2), supplication (2), negative events misrepresented (2), and boasting (2). The
eight instances of ingratiation included five uses of opinion conformity and three uses of
flattery.
Crosstabulations indicated that with the media, the most frequently used strategy
was also prosocial behavior (4), followed by negative events misrepresented (2). Only six
codes were applied to messages directed at the media. Messages were either coded
prosocial behavior or negative events misrepresented, revealing that SGM used the same
approach with the media that they used with church members and with the public.
Of the stakeholders, the two groups addressed most frequently were church
members and the public. Prosocial behavior was the leading strategy for all three
stakeholder groups. Prosocial behavior and negative events misrepresented were used for
146
all three stakeholder types. In addition to prosocial behavior, ingratiation, and negative
events misrepresented, the following strategies were used for both church members and
the public: organizational promotion, supplication, and boasting.
SGM only used burnishing (11), organizational handicapping (10), and the excuse
tactics of denial of agency (4) and denial of intention (2) when speaking to the public.
Other strategies used exclusively with the public included denial of victim, condemning
the condemner, references to normative practices, references to rational practices,
blasting, and belittling.
eight most used tactics: prosocial behavior, ingratiation, burnishing, organizational
handicapping, negative events misrepresented, boasting, excuse, and organizational
promotion. Figures 6 through 8 explore each individual stakeholder type. The frequency
of OIM tactics is reported for each stakeholder type.
OIM Strategies by Stakeholder Type (SGM)

35 30
30
25
20
15 12 11 10
10 7 8 6
8
4 5 5
5 2 2 2 2
0
Public Church Members Media
Figure 5. OIM strategies by stakeholder type (SGM)

147
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h P ubl i c (S GM )

Public
30
11
10
Figure 6. OIM strategies used with public (SGM)

148
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h C hurch Mem bers (S GM)

Church Members
12
2
Figure 7. OIM strategies used with church members (SGM)
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h Medi a (S GM)

Media
4
PRO-SOCIAL BEHAVIOR NEGATIVE EVENTS MISREPRESENTED
Figure 8. OIM strategies used with media (SGM)

149
Mars Hill Church. All but 21 of the 290 units of analysis were directed at church
members, making comparisons between stakeholder types difficult. However, a few
observations are worth noting. Crosstabulations indicated that with church members, the
most frequently occurring strategy was organizational promotion (47), followed by
ingratiation (43), boasting (41), supplication (32), excuse (24), apology (23), prosocial
behavior (22), burnishing (11), condemning the condemner (8), references to historical
practices (6), negative events misrepresented (4), organizational handicapping (3), blaring
(3), blasting (2), blurring (2), and boosting (1). The 43 instances of ingratiation consisted
of 23 uses of flattery and 20 uses of opinion conformity. The 23 instances of excuse
consisted of 21 uses of denial of volition and three uses of denial of intention.
Crosstabulations indicated that with church leaders, the most frequently used
strategy was prosocial behavior (4), followed by condemning the condemner (3),
negative events misrepresented (3), ingratiation (2), supplication (1), and burnishing (1).
The two uses of ingratiation consisted of flattery.
Crosstabulations indicated that organizational promotion (1) and negative events
misrepresented (1) were the only strategies used with the media while negative events
misrepresented (1), references to historical practices (1), and boasting (1) were the only
strategies used with the public.
Of the stakeholders, church members were addressed most frequently. Negative
events misrepresented was the only strategy used with all four stakeholder groups. All the
strategies used for the church leaders, media, and public stakeholder groups were also
used for the church members group. The following strategies were only used with church
members: opinion conformity, excuse, organizational handicapping, apology, blaring,

150
blasting, blurring, and boosting. While negative events misrepresented was used with all
four stakeholder groups, there were no strategies that were used with three of the
stakeholder groups.
seven most used tactics: organizational promotion, ingratiation, boasting, supplication,
prosocial behavior, excuse, and apology. Figures 10 through 13 explore each individual
stakeholder type. The frequency of OIM tactics is reported for each stakeholder type.
OIM Strategies by Stakeholder Type (MHC)

50 47
43 41
45
40
35 32
30 24
22 23
25
20
15
10 4
5 1 2 1 1
0
Church Leaders Church Members Media Public
Figure 9. OIM strategies by stakeholder type (MHC)

151
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h C hurch Mem bers (MHC )

Church Members
48
43
41
32
24
23
22
11
1
Figure 10. OIM strategies used with church members (MHC)
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h C hurch Leaders (MHC )

Church Leaders
4
Figure 11. OIM strategies used with church leaders (MHC)

152
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h P ubl i c (MHC ) )

Public
1
BOASTING NEGATIVE EVENTS REFERENCES TO HISTORICAL
MISREPRESENTED PRACTICES
Figure 12. OIM strategies used with public (MHC)
OIM S t rat egi es Used Wi t h Medi a (MHC )

Media
1
ORGANIZATIONAL PROMOTION NEGATIVE EVENTS MISREPRESENTED
Figure 13. OIM strategies used with media (MHC)

153
Research Question 3
This researcher conducted a QCA of content collected from three organizations:
Bob Jones University, Sovereign Grace Ministries, and Mars Hill Church. An analysis of
the data sought to answer the question, did each image-threatening event evoke similar
impression management strategies for the same targets? In this section, the data relevant
to that question is displayed, beginning with a description of the most common strategies
observed across all three cases. Significant findings will then be displayed for each OIM
strategy relevant to patterns observed across all three cases and across all stakeholder
groups.
A total of 387,748 words were read across all three cases during the data
collection phase. A total of 599 excerpts were coded during the coding phase. 639 codes
were applied to the excerpts. Prosocial behavior was the most frequently applied code,
having been observed 109 times. Excuse was indicated in 85 excerpts, 70 of which were
coded as denial of volition. Organizational promotion tactics were observed in 80 units of
analysis, followed by ingratiation (77), boasting (58), supplication (39), negative events
misrepresented (32), burnishing (25), apology (24), organizational handicapping (19),
justification (16), condemning the condemner (15), blaring (7), references to historical
practices (7), burying (7), blasting (5), exemplification (5), belittling (2), references to
rational practices (2), boosting (2), references to normative practices (1), comparison with
industry practices (1), and restitution (1). Intimidation was the only OIM tactic that was
not observed in any content.
The OIM strategies that were of primary use in each organization included
prosocial behavior, organizational promotion, ingratiation, boasting, negative events

154
misrepresented, excuse, and organizational handicapping. Figure 14 displays the relative
frequencies of the top OIM strategies used by each organization.
Top OIM Strategies Used by Each Organization

60
53
50 48
46 45
42
40 37
30 26
24
22
20 15
13 14
10 9 9 9
10 7 6
0
Pro-social Organizational Ingratiation Boasting Negative Events Excuse
Behavior Promotion Misrepresented
BJU SGM MHC
Figure 14. Top OIM strategies used by each organization
Prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior was a primary OIM tactic employed by
each organization. It was the primary strategy used by SGM, an organization that faced
allegations of conspiracy and cover-up of child sexual abuse. It was the second most
strategy used by BJU, an organization that also received attention due to concerns related
to sexual assault. For both BJU and SGM, prosocial behavior tactics focused on the
organization’s concern for safety, disdain for abuse, and demonstrations of actions taken
to make their organizations safer. Prosocial behavior was the fourth most used strategy of
MHC and primarily focused on the church’s efforts to fulfill its mission to evangelize
non-Christians and teach the Bible. Prosocial behavior was primarily used by BJU and
SGM when addressing the public and primarily used by MHC when addressing its church
155
members. BJU and SGM also used prosocial behavior tactics when addressing their
members. Table 5 displays excerpts of prosocial behavior tactics.
Table 5
Excerpts of Prosocial Behavior Tactics
Organization Excerpt
We undertook this project to continue to improve the ways we minister

BJU
to our students, particularly those who have suffered sexual abuse or
assault.
I’m personally grateful that Sovereign Grace churches have taken the
SGM
protection of children and care for victims seriously for many years.
We are not a church that defines itself by what we are against. Our
identity is in Jesus and we want to be known for what we are for. We
are for Jesus. We are for sinners (like us) receiving God’s grace and
MHC
salvation. We are for people knowing and believing the Bible. We are
for real, authentic life change. We are for forgiveness. We are for
reconciliation. We are for restoration. And we are for redemption.
Organizational promotion. Organizational promotion was a primary tactic
employed by each organization. It was the primary strategy used by MHC and was seen
in statements that brought attention to the organization’s success. It was the third most
used strategy of BJU and primarily focused on the organization’s values. It was the fourth
most used strategy of SGM and centered around the organization’s integrity.
Organizational promotion was used in each organization when addressing their members.
It was used by both BJU and SGM when addressing the public. MHC was the only
organization to employ it when addressing the media. Table 6 displays excerpts of
organizational promotion tactics.

156
Table 6
Excerpts of Organizational Promotion Tactics
BJU I believe if you came to the campus you would sense an atmosphere
that is humble, transparent, and loving.
SGM is committed to integrity and faithfulness in pastoral care, as are

SGM
the pastors of local congregations.
When a small group of us started what would become Mars Hill

Church in 1996, we could not have dreamed it would be what it is
today. Thousands upon thousands of people have become Christians as
MHC the gospel of Jesus Christ has proven powerful over and over. Every
day, it seems, I hear of someone whose life has been transformed by the
power of the Word of God taught in this place and modeled by so many
who call this their church home.
Ingratiation. Ingratiation was a primary tactic used by each organization. It was
the second most utilized tactic by both MHC and SGM and the fifth most used tactic by
BJU. Ingratiation can take various forms. The two types of ingratiation observed were
flattery and opinion conformity. Each organization used both types of ingratiation. Table
7 displays excerpts of flattery tactics, and Table 8 displays excerpts of opinion
comformity tactics.
157
Table 7
Excerpts of Flattery Tactics
I would like to express my love and respect for our faculty and staff.
BJU
Throughout this entire report process, you have been patient, kind and
hopeful.
Over the past 14 months I have traveled to 31 of our churches and

spoken with many members and leaders. There isn’t a group of people
SGM
in the world with whom I would rather labor in advancing the gospel
than you.
Some of the most loving, generous, resilient people that any pastor has
had the joy of leading and loving, and so it just is quite a miracle to be
MHC
on this train with you and I’m exceedingly grateful for Jesus’ grace to
me, and to us, and you are part of that grace.
Table 8
Excerpts of Opinion Conformity Tactics
The reason we have been silent is that we do not want the focus to be
BJU on us. We wanted our former students who were victims of sexual
abuse to know that they were more important to us than even our own
institutional reputation.
SGM We side with the victims.
As we work towards a new future together in service to Jesus, we are

still called to be the people of God in every arena of life. This means
that it will be more important than ever that each one of us that calls
MHC
Mars Hill Church home continues to operate in faithfulness through
serving God’s people, giving generously to God’s work, and loving one
another well.
158
Boasting. Boasting was the only indirect tactic used with significant frequency
by each organization. It was the third-most used tactic by MHC, the sixth most used
tactic by BJU, and the seventh most used tactic by SGM. The only other indirect tactic
that was used more than boasting by any organization was burnishing, which was the
third most used tactic by SGM. Boasting attempts to highlight the organization’s positive
connection with a favorable other. The following excerpts show how the other may be an
expert, God, or an external board. Table 9 displays excerpts of boasting tactics.
Table 9
Excerpts of Boasting Tactics
BJU’s understanding of sexual abuse/assault counseling and our

procedures for counseling victims developed and improved over time
as our primary counselor worked to gain knowledge, reading books and
articles on the topic as they began to be published in the mid– to late
‘80s. Diane Langberg, current chair of the executive board of the
BJU
American Association of Christian Counselors and GRACE board
member, recounts a similar experience. In her 2003 book, “Counseling
Survivors of Sexual Abuse,” she said of her own professional training,
“Sexual abuse was not ever discussed in graduate school. There were
no seminars, workshops or articles available. I learned from my
clients.”
Still, my trust remains in the Lord, who comforts the brokenhearted and
SGM
promises in his justice and in his time to right every wrong.
I have also submitted these decisions to the Board of Advisors and

Accountability. They have approved of this direction and are 100
MHC percent supportive of these changes. It’s a wonderful thing to have true
accountability and not be an independent decision maker regarding my
ministry and, most importantly, our church.
159
Negative events misrepresented. Negative events misrepresented was a primary
tactic used by each organization. It was the fourth most used tactic by BJU, the sixth most
used tactic by SGM, and the ninth most used tactic by MHC. Each organization used the
tactic defensively to suggest that certain allegations were either untrue, misleading, or
without merit. Table 10 displays excerpts of negative events misrepresented tactics.
Table 10
Excerpts of Negative Events Misrepresented Tactics
I am just telling you the reality. I am not defending that reality. I am

just saying, that was the reality here. But, what I will defend is that this
BJU
was not ever an effort to keep this from being reported as a crime.
Never. Once we understood something as a crime, it went down as a
crime.
Upon initial review it appears the complaint contains a number of

SGM untrue or misleading allegations, as well as considerable
mischaracterizations of intent.
Be assured of this, the formal charges that were filed were serious,
were taken seriously and were not dismissed by the board lightly. There
MHC is clear evidence that the attitudes and behaviors attributed to Mark in
the charges are not a part and have not been a part of Mark’s life for
some time now.
Excuse. Excuse was a primary tactic used by each of the organizations. It was
the most used tactic by BJU, the sixth most used tactic by MHC, and the eighth most
used tactic by SGM. Excuses take various forms and include denial of volition, denial of
agency, and denial of intention. Denial of volition was the primary excuse tactic used by
BJU. Denial of volition was also the primary excuse tactic used by MHC. In contrast,
160
denial of volition was not observed in any statements from SGM. Denial of agency was
the primary excuse tactic used by SGM. Table 11 displays excerpts of excuse tactics.
Table 11
Excerpts of Excuse Tactics
Knowing what we know today, we blew it...I don’t have any defense
except that I was not thinking that way. That was just not the mindset at
that point. I don’t have anything else to say about it. Looking at it, there
BJU is not a defense. I can’t say that we did it for this reason and this
reason, we weighed these and decided to do that; we didn’t weigh
anything, we didn’t know anything to weigh. Looking at it today, it
should not have been handled that way. I can see how it looks to you. It
looks really strange that we are this ignorant but we are-we were.
It is important to note that it does not allege any act of child abuse by a
SGM
pastor or staff member of SGM or of an associated church.
Something else that has really been highlighted for me in this season is,
my empathy for women and children tends to be higher than my
empathy for men and sometimes, out of a desire to, to love and serve
women and children, I have not been as loving as I could or should
MHC have been to men, especially in some personal communications and
conversations, and so, and so that is an area where I am growing by
God’s grace, I hope and trust and pray that in the future you’ll have a
better pastor next year than you have this year, and that this year you
have a better pastor than you did last year.
Member stakeholder groups. Each organization addressed its members in
response to the image-threatening event. MHC communicated with its church members.
SGM communicated with all those who were members of an SGM church. BJU
communicated with its student body. The following strategies were observed in each
organization’s messages to its members: organizational promotion, prosocial behavior,

161
ingratiation, supplication, negative events misrepresented, and boasting. Therefore, each
image-threatening event did evoke similar OIM strategies towards members.
Thirty-six uses of OIM strategies were identified in messages from BJU to
members of its student body. Organizational promotion was used 11 times, followed by
prosocial behavior (7), excuse (4), ingratiation (4), blaring (3), boasting (2), burying (2),
exemplification (1), supplication (1), negative events misrepresented (1), and blurring (1).
Twenty-eight uses of OIM strategies were identified in messages from SGM to
its church members. Prosocial behavior was used 12 times, followed by ingratiation (8),
organizational promotion (2), supplication (2), negative events misrepresented (2), and
boasting (2).
Two hundred seventy-two uses of OIM strategies were identified in messages
from MHC to its church members. Organizational promotion was used 47 times,
followed by ingratiation (43), boasting (41), supplication (32), excuse (24), apology (23),
prosocial behavior (22), burnishing (11), condemning the condemner (8), references to
historical practices (6), negative events misrepresented (4), blaring (3), organizational
handicapping (3), blasting (2), blurring (2), and boosting (1).
Public stakeholder groups. Each organization addressed the public in response
to the image-threatening event. Boasting was the only strategy used by all three
organizations in communications to the public. Only one statement from MHC was
addressed to the public and was in response to its use of a marketing group to attain
placement of one of Driscoll’s books on the New York Times Bestseller list. It used the
tactic of boasting when it stated, “In 2011, outside counsel advised our marketing team to
use Result Source to market the Real Marriage book . . .” BJU and MHC addressed the
162
public more extensively, and a comparison between their messages to the public is worth
making.
The following strategies were used by both BJU and SGM in communications
targeting the public: prosocial behavior, organizational promotion, opinion conformity,
organizational handicapping, boasting, supplication, and blasting. Prosocial behavior was
the primary tactic used by both organizations. Therefore, the image-threatening events
faced by BJU and SGM did evoke similar OIM strategies towards the public.
Media stakeholder group. Each organization addressed the media in response
to the image-threatening event. However, there were only a total of nine tactics observed
across all three organizations. Both SGM and MHC used the tactic of negative events
misrepresented. SGM used the tactic of prosocial behavior coupled with negative events
misrepresented. MHC used the tactic of organizational promotion coupled with negative
events misrepresented. Both organizations attempted to highlight their positive attributes
while denying the truthfulness of the accusations. BJU used the strategy of condemning
the condemner in response to an inquiry regarding an open letter written by members of
the task force involved in the investigative process: “Each member of the task force
signed a confidentiality agreement stating they would not disclose any deliberations or
information from the task force meeting.”
Leadership stakeholder group. Each organization addressed leaders within its
organization. BJU addressed its faculty and employees while MHC addressed its pastors
and staff. Each organization used the strategies of flattery and burnishing when
addressing the leadership stakeholder group. Both are assertive strategies and serve the
common goal of polishing those the organization is positively connected to. Table 12
163
displays uses of flattery with leadership by BJU and MHC. Table 13 displays their use of
burnishing with leadership.
Table 12
BJU and MHC Uses of Flattery with Leadership
I would like to express my love and respect for our faculty and staff.
BJU
Throughout this entire report process, you have been patient, kind and
hopeful.
My counsel to you is to not become bitter or angry. Continue to pray

for all involved. Continue to love and lead the people God has brought
MHC
to your churches. They need a pastor right now and God has given
them you!
Table 13
BJU and MHC Uses of Burnishing with Leadership
To be honest, I have the greatest admiration for Stephen Jones, who

BJU wanted to be an example to the United States of America, being the
first faith-based organization to put ourselves in the position to review
the way we've done things over the years . . .
You need to know that I and the other Board members have witnessed
the Holy Spirit’s work in Pastors Mark, Dave and Sutton as they’ve
MHC
grieved deeply over the hurts and sorrows that they’ve been the source
of. Their hearts yearn for repentance
164
Evaluation of the Research Design
This study utilized qualitative content analysis. Having conducted the research
and analyzed the data, this researcher believes qualitative content analysis was an
effective methodological design for accomplishing the research purposes. Due to the
public nature of a scandal that threatens the image of an organization, organizations are
often forced to respond in public ways. Those responses are publicly available and serve
as material for content analysis.
Qualitative content analysis was appropriate because of the need to understand
the latent meaning of the content and not simply its manifest meaning. Because meaning
is often found below the surface of the words on the text and not in the words themselves,
qualitative interpretation was necessary.
Chapter Summary
This chapter provided an overview of the methods and protocols used to guide
this study. It also presented the data relevant to each of the research questions. A
sequential, systematic analysis of the data for each organization was conducted and
discussed. The focus of the presentation and analysis of data was primarily placed on the
OIM strategies and not on the organizations. Strategies were identified, patterns
discussed, and comparisons between cases and stakeholder types were drawn.
165
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
This chapter presents conclusions and applications from the research conducted in
Chapters 1 through 4. This chapter restates the research purpose and research questions,
discusses the findings relevant to each research question, explores research implications
through a theological and biblical grid for the issues of impression management and
crisis, states research limitations, offers recommendations for future research, and makes
final conclusions.
Research Purpose
of an image-threatening event. Previous research has focused primarily on individual
impression management. Far fewer studies have been conducted on organizational
impression management. Even fewer have evaluated OIM in response to a crisis,
especially a crisis of scandal due to human failure. No studies had been conducted on the
use of OIM by evangelical organizations. This qualitative content analysis followed a
sequence of steps typical to the chosen methodological design. This adherence to
conventional content analysis demonstrated the desire and attempt by the researcher to be
as systematic and objective as possible. It consisted of three primary phases: data
collection, the creation of a coding frame, and coding. The results of the coding were
displayed and analyzed in Chapter 4.

166
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event?
Research Findings
The three research questions were designed to aid this researcher’s purpose to
identify and describe the impression management strategies used by certain evangelical
organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event. The organizations selected for
this study included Bob Jones University, Sovereign Grace Ministries, and Mars Hill
Church. In the next section, conclusions are made for each research question using the
analysis of the data presented in Chapter 4.
Research Question 1: Which, if any, impression management strategies were

employed by the organizations in the wake of an image-threatening event?
A primary goal of this study was to determine which, if any, OIM strategies were
used by BJU, SGM, and MHC in response to a negative event that threatened their
positive image. According to prior research on individual impression management,
excuse is the leading strategy used by individuals in interpersonal relationships.
Similarly, excuse was the primary strategy used by BJU, particularly a type of excuse
called denial of volition. However, the majority of the statements coded as excuse were
offered during individual exchanges with investigators. When not speaking to

167
investigators, BJU primarily relied on prosocial behavior. This suggests that when
addressing society at-large, perhaps evangelical organizations feel a greater need to create
a positive impression of the organization than they do to excuse responsibility for a
negative event.
Each organization repeatedly mentioned its contribution to its stakeholders, its
past successes, and its future potential. These primarily appeared in organizational
promotion tactics and prosocial behavior messages. Direct assertive organizational
promotion tactics centered on accomplishments, values, and commitments while direct
defensive prosocial behavior tactics centered on concern for victims, disdain for abuses,
and demonstrations of change. These two strategies may be meaningful to organizations
facing crises in that such messages might serve to diffuse a crisis at its outset by drawing
attention to the positive characteristics of the organization. The organization can then
dilute the negative event by drowning it in a sea of good. The result is stakeholders view
the event as a phenomenon that should not be fairly linked to the organization.
Each organization also utilized negative events misrepresented with frequency.
Often this tactic was used alongside another tactic that cast the organization in a positive
light or provided an excuse for not explaining with any detail why they believed they
were being misrepresented. For example, SGM used organizational handicapping tactics
on separate occasions as ready-made excuses for not speaking publicly about allegations
that they conspired to cover-up sexual abuse, except to say the allegations were untrue.
Ingratiation appeared frequently with each organization, most often in the form of
opinion conformity. Attempts were made to communicate to victims and members that
the organization was on their side. It is notable that each organization argued
168
misrepresentation while simultaneously claiming to be on the side of the victims.
Discounting the testimony of victims is quite the opposite of siding with them.
The most prominent indirect tactics were boasting and burnishing. Both attempt to
cast the organization or its leaders in a positive light, either by claiming a positive link to
another the audience likes or by polishing and flattering another they are positively linked
to. Often the tactics were observed in tandem. An organization may boast in its positive
connection with another leader then burnish that leader to enhance both the leader and the
connection to the leader.
Despite the amount of concerns raised against each of the organizations, there was
a paucity of apologies and offers of restitution. One may suggest MHC is an exception to
this conclusion, but the majority of the apologies were either attached to excuses or were
offered by an individual leader who was not the primary person at fault. BJU’s lone
statement of apology failed to take direct responsibility for inflicting harm and did not
invite any penalty. Its offer of restitution was directed at one single student and not all
those who were failed. This suggests that an organization may seek to apologize without
acknowledging responsibility or accepting penalty.
SGM did not make any apologies. For SGM to offer an apology would have
required admitting guilt and inviting certain penalty. Because of SGM’s involvement in a
lawsuit, it may have been reluctant to admit any error. However, if SGM had
acknowledged responsibility in some areas, perhaps in failing to discern abusive
leadership or respond well to victims, some stakeholders might view the organization
with less skepticism.

169
Research Question 2: Did the organizations use different impression management

strategies for different targets? If so, which strategies were used for different
targets?
Another purpose of this study was to assess whether the organizations used
different strategies for different targets, and if so, which strategies were used for which
targets? Goffman (1959) theorized that individual actors adjust their script as they read
and respond to audience engagement. He believed that individuals use different strategies
for different targets depending on their goals for the different audience types. Research
added validity to this theory. For example, Caillouet (1991) found that an environmental
waste company used different impression management strategies for different
stakeholders in response to the same negative event. Similarly, Marcus and Goodman
(1991) discovered that during a crisis due to leadership failure, leaders were forced with
choosing to use accommodative strategies benefiting those hurt by the failures (such as
apologies) or defensive strategies benefiting those they perceived as holding power (such
as excuses).
BJU used different strategies with different targets. While it primarily used
ingratiation when addressing victims, alumni, and employees, they used organizational
promotion when speaking to the student body, prosocial behavior when making public
statements, excuses when responding to investigators, and condemning the condemner
when addressing the media.
For the public, BJU tended to use prosocial behavior tactics, followed by
organizational promotion. Organizational promotion was the leading strategy when
addressing the student body, followed by prosocial behavior. This perhaps suggests that
BJU was concerned with affirming its values and commitments to the student body while
170
proclaiming its shared concerns for societal issues when speaking to the public. On the
other hand, BJU faculty and employees felt more freedom when speaking to investigators
to discuss those negative events and their connections with unfavorable others. However,
excuses were prominently present throughout messages to investigators. Therefore, while
BJU was more open about negative events and associations with investigators, it also
tended to offer excuses for those events and associations.
Only three stakeholder groups were identified as targets of SGM messages:
church members, media, and the public. Prosocial behavior was the leading approach to
each stakeholder group. Therefore, SGM primarily used the same tactic for each target.
Negative events misrepresented tactics were also used with all three groups and existed
alongside prosocial behavior tactics. SGM’s primary strategy, irrespective of audience,
seems to have been to argue misrepresentation and then spotlight their positive attributes
relative to the issue of child sexual abuse. The effect of such a two-pronged approach is
that targets will believe the events are likely being misrepresented given the prosocial
behaviors of the organization.
Ingratiation tactics were used with both church members and public. Opinion
conformity was used with both groups, but only flattery was used with church members.
SGM would have no reason to flatter the public but would have reason to increase the
liking of those who attend their churches. Organizational promotion, supplication, and
boasting were also used with both church members and public, suggesting that SGM’s
goals for both the public and its members include defending its positive image, gaining
help or sympathy, and proclaiming a positive connection to a favorable other.

171
Certain strategies were only used when addressing the public: excuse,
justification, condemning the condemner, organizational handicapping, references to
normative practices, references to rational practices, burnishing, blasting, and belittling.
Some of this is due to the fact that some of SGM’s partners came to the public defense of
SGM and Mahaney. These statements focused on shaping the public’s view of SGM and
Mahaney by praising Mahaney, making reference to normative and rational practices, and
condemning condemners. Statements from Mahaney and SGM’s board focused on
shaping the public’s perception by suggesting they were handicapped by a lawsuit and
thus could not speak publicly, except to say that events were being misrepresented, that
they were not the agent of harm, and that their intentions were being unfairly
mischaracterized. A particular strategy of interest that emerged throughout the study was
SGM’s reluctance to speak to the public except when it felt it necessary to refute claims
and defend its pastors.
In summary, although SGM relied primarily on the strategies of prosocial
behavior and negative events misrepresented with all targets, its approach to the public
differed in some ways from its approach to its church members.
Four stakeholder groups were identified as targets of MHC’s messages: church
leaders, church members, media, and public. The majority of MHC’s messages collected
for coding and analysis were directed at church members. The second most targeted
group were church leaders, followed by the public, then the media. The only strategy
used with each stakeholder group was negative events misrepresented, suggesting that
MHC was concerned with being misrepresented irrespective of the audience.

172
One could group the four stakeholder types into two categories: internal,
consisting of church leaders and church members, and external, consisting of media and
public. When speaking to internal stakeholders, MHC used the strategies of ingratiation,
supplication, condemning the condemner, negative events misrepresented, and prosocial
behavior. When speaking to external stakeholders, MHC used the strategy of negative
events misrepresented. It might be expected that tactics such as ingratiation and
supplication would only be effective with internal stakeholders. Negative events
misrepresented, on the other hand, might be an effective tactic with any target.
Research Question 3: Did each image-threatening event evoke similar impression

management strategies for the same targets?
BJU, SGM, and MHC each faced negative events that threatened their image.
There are two significant factors to consider when comparing and contrasting their use of
OIM. First, BJU and SGM both faced events involving sexual abuse while MHC had to
respond to accusations of abuses of authority. It is possible that events involving
accusations of criminal behavior illicit a different kind of response than events involving
non-criminal failures. It might also be that events involving the abuse of children and
young adults produce a different response then events involving mistreatment of adults.
This may explain why BJU and SGM relied heavily on defensive tactics like prosocial
behavior (SGM) and denial of volition (BJU) while MHC relied most heavily on
assertive tactics like organizational promotion, ingratiation, and boasting. Second, each
event became a matter of public concern and received extensive media coverage. While
BJU and MHC came to publicly acknowledge their responsibility for some of the
negative events, SGM has not yet to date acknowledged culpability. This may explain
why SGM did not have any messages coded as apology or restitution.
173
The OIM strategies that were of primary use in each organization include
prosocial behavior, organizational promotion, ingratiation, boasting, negative events
misrepresented, excuse, and organizational handicapping. This suggests that the negative
events evoked similar impression management strategies.
Each of the organizations addressed the public, and boasting was the only tactic
common to all approaches to the public. However, only one statement from MHC was
addressed to the public, making comparisons between all three organizations difficult.
This, however, is significant in that it suggests each of the organizations wanted to
portray a certain image to the public by making a positive connection to another the
public views favorably. Often these other persons or organizations are experts known to
the public, attorneys, or prosocial organizations.
BJU and SGM communicated more frequently with the public. When addressing
the public, both organizations used prosocial behavior as their leading strategy,
suggesting that their primary goal for the public was to be seen as responsible, safe,
concerned for victims, and law-abiding. Both organizations also sought to conform to the
side of the public, promote their values and integrity, and provide handicapping reasons
for having made past mistakes (BJU) or not disclosing more information (SGM).
Therefore, it can be concluded that both BJU and SGM employed the same approach to
the public in response to a negative event.
Each of the organizations used prosocial behavior tactics when addressing its
members, suggesting that organizations are concerned with providing their members with
assurances that the organization is a positive contributor to society. Each also used
organizational promotion, primarily to highlight its successes, commitments, and values.

174
Ingratiation was also a leading strategy used by each organization when addressing its
members. Members were complimented and praised for their support, patience, and
commitment to the organization. Supplication was used by each organization to request
help in the form of prayers, patience, and commitment. These strategies all combine to
present a positive image of the organization to its members.
BJU was the only organization to speak to investigators, but it is worth noting that
the number one strategy used was excuse, a strategy utilized with far less frequency when
speaking to other stakeholder groups. Organizations may be more concerned with
maintaining a favorable image with their members and more interested with escaping
responsibility when speaking to investigators. This aligns with the findings of Marcus
and Goodman (1991) who discovered that organizations use different strategies with
different targets depending on their goals for the targets. If the goal of BJU is to maintain
the favor of its members, employees, and alumni, then it makes sense it would use
strategies that foster a positive image. However, if the goal of BJU when speaking to
investigators is to escape or downplay responsibility, then it makes sense that it would
use defensive strategies like excuse.
Both organizations attempted to highlight their positive attributes while denying
the truthfulness of the accusations. This suggests that negative events misrepresented
used in tandem with prosocial behavior or organizational promotion may serve as a two-
pronged approach that denies the truthfulness of allegations while simultaneously
presenting the organization as incapable of such kind of behavior. Negative events
misrepresented is the only tactic used with every stakeholder group.

175
In conclusion, each of the image-threatening events evoked similar OIM
strategies in response to the same targets. Prosocial behavior was most frequently used
when addressing the public, ingratiation when speaking to leadership, and negative
events misrepresented when communicating with the media. This suggests that
organizations will use different strategies for different targets and that image-threatening
events will evoke a similar script in which common strategies will be used for the same
stakeholder types.
Research Implications
The findings of this research have significant implications for evangelical
organizations, for those harmed by organizational failure, and for the organizations’
stakeholders. First, the findings might aid organizations with an understanding of
impression management behavior and its consequences. Such an understanding might
lead organizations to respond to image-threatening events in redemptive and Christ-like
ways. Second, the research can provide insights into the harmful effects a crisis can have
on victims. Third, it might also equip stakeholders with the knowledge and discernment
to be able to recognize and describe impression managements strategies being used by
evangelical organizations in crisis. They will then be better equipped to respond to those
strategies in ways that encourage truth-telling and transparency.
Implications for Evangelical Organizations
When a crisis happens, organizations and their leaders are faced with two choices
when it comes time to give an account to their stakeholders and community: (1) adopt
truth-telling and transparency, irrespective of the impact on one’s approval, status, or
image or (2) apply both organizational-level and individual-level impression management

176
strategies intended to portray approval, status, or a positive image. This research may
help evangelical organizations respond with truth-telling by making them aware of tactics
that might be counterproductive to truth and transparency.
The research may also help evangelical organizations guard against the
development of a clan culture mentality and the undue prioritization of the protection of
the organization’s reputation. Each of the organizations selected for this study were
characterized by clan cultures. Clan cultures are characterized by closely knit family
bonds. BJU, SGM, and MHC were each founded and led by a group of friends or family
members. This closeness might heighten the tendency to protect friends or family
members by covering up their secrets or mistakes (Brumfield, 2012). Also, each of the
organizations engaged in OIM tactics that defended the reputation of its leaders.
Statements were made by each organization praising the integrity of its leaders. A pitfall
inherent to these dynamics is the propensity an organization might feel to manage the
impressions others form of it for the purpose of protecting a reputation.
The decision to focus on managing the organization’s image can cause negative
consequences for the both the organization and the individuals affected by the crisis.
First, the organization may become increasingly concerned with covering up evil actions
for the sake of preserving a positive appearance. Second, organizations may choose to
protect themselves by choosing not to enter into the specific details of a situation. Third,
as Shrivastava (1987) contended, often it is the victims of a crisis that are the most
profoundly impacted. Fourth, organizations that choose to prioritize the management of
their image may act in ways that are destructive rather than redemptive. Fifth, the use of
impression management strategies for the purpose of deception can cause an organization
177
to become increasingly adept at using deceit, manipulation, and secrecy in its response to
image-threatening events. Lastly, the use of impression management to protect close
relational ties within the organization can reinforce and strengthen a clan culture
mentality.
Recognizing these dimensions and their potential to produce negative
consequences, this research implies that evangelical organizations can avoid relying too
heavily on impression management tactics by protecting themselves from a clan culture
mentality and by guarding against an unhealthy preoccupation with protecting
reputations.
The findings of this research, when viewed through a biblical framework, also
provide implications for evangelical organizations. First, an analysis of the biblical text
has already shown that dark-side leadership and a reliance upon impression management
behavior walk hand-in-hand. Furthermore, there are some common patterns between the
impression management behaviors identified in the biblical text and the impression
management tactics identified in this qualitative content analysis of material from BJU,
SGM, and MHC. First, Saul used six different tactics in his exchange with Samuel (1
Sam. 15): self-promotion, excuse, prosocial behavior, self-handicapping, and ingratiation.
Each of these were commonly used strategies of the organizations selected for this
research study. Second, Rabshakeh was sent as diplomatic spokesperson to speak to the
Israelites on behalf of Assyria. His messages consisted entirely of indirect impression
management tactics like boasting, blasting, and belittling. Similarly, certain friends of
SGM released statements in defense of SGM. Those statements also consisted almost
entirely of indirect impression management tactics, suggesting that organizations might

178
enlist others to serve as spokespeople. Those spokespeople might use indirect strategies,
as opposed to direct strategies, to manage impressions.
Implications for Those Harmed by a Crisis
This research may also have implications for victims of a crisis. In each of these
cases, individuals claimed to have been harmed by the actions of the organization. Those
claims threatened the identity of the organizations and their leaders. In response, an
evangelical organization might make serving the interests of those in power their primary
goal and in doing so sideline the interests of the victims. Whereas impression
management may serve the interests of the organization’s reputation, truth-telling serves
the interest of the victim. An organization might choose to respond by focusing on those
who have been harmed, listening to them, offering apologies, and making restitution. In
doing so, the organization might invite penalties, some of which could include damage to
reputations and the extinction of the organization. Therefore, in choosing to focus on the
victims, the organization might need to forget about itself. Conversely, in choosing to
focus on its reputation and survival, the organization might need to forget about the
victims. A focus on those who have been harmed includes a willingness to apologize in
ways that do not just recognize how the organization’s actions have made people feel but
in ways that acknowledge how people have been harmed by the organization and take
responsibility. In recognizing harm, the victim-centric organization might then engage
with the victims to determine what restitution is required.
Implications for Stakeholders
This research also has implications for stakeholders. In being able to recognize,
label, and describe impression management behaviors, stakeholders will be able to resist
179
the ways in which such behaviors can be used to manipulate. They may also notice when
hierarchical organizations centralize power, especially in crisis, so all decisions are made
at the top. In recognizing this early on, followers may be empowered to speak up in ways
that prevent such centralization. Followers may also begin to recognize the important role
they play as an audience. Impression management might be used to keep what happens
behind the scenes hidden, so the show can continue. Followers must recognize that it is
not just those doing the hiding who are at fault but also all those who benefit from the
show and want it to continue.
Research Limitations
The research in this study is limited by several factors including sample size for
certain stakeholder groups and differences in event types. The sample size for certain
stakeholder types was small in some instances. A small sample size makes conclusions
difficult to draw because the findings might be different if all content was available for a
stakeholder type. For example, this researcher had a limited amount of content addressed
to leadership. Even though each organization may have communicated extensively with
its leaders, that communication was not publicly available. Therefore, the data for those
stakeholder groups may be difficult to generalize. Also, some organizations addressed
stakeholder types that other organizations did not, making comparisons limited to only
stakeholder groups that each organization addressed.
There were also differences in event types. Although each event threatened the
image of the organization, the researcher does not know how the various types of crises
may have influenced the impression management tactics involved. Therefore, it might be
180
difficult to generalize one organization’s response because it may be unique to its own
unique event.
Recommendations for Further Research
This qualitative content analysis attempted to build off of a theoretical framework
by identifying and explaining OIM strategies used by evangelical organizations in the
wake of image-threatening events. The field of OIM is relatively new and largely
undiscovered. Within that wide-open field, there is a particular dearth of research on the
topic of OIM strategies used in the wake of image-threatening events. To this
researcher’s knowledge, no other research to date has studied OIM strategies among
evangelical organizations facing image-threatening events. While other organizational
sectors are underrepresented in OIM research, the evangelical sector remained
completely devoid of OIM research. Especially intriguing in light of the theoretical
framework provided is the public role that evangelical organizations possess, making
them prone to identity threats and the kind of response to crisis that includes the
dynamics of impression management. Thus, further research on how evangelical
organizations use OIM in response to threats to their image might provide theoretical
insights, education, and benchmarking for other researchers.
Future research may include an analysis of OIM strategies used by smaller
evangelical organizations. One could do a qualitative content analysis if the negative
event was extreme enough to garner public attention. A small church might need to
manage its public image if it receives public attention.
A more in-depth exploration of a single case might yield more insight into how an
evangelical organization manages its image in the wake of an image-threatening event.

181
Research might uncover whether different spokespeople use different OIM tactics. For
example, studies could show the differences between tactics used by senior leadership
and tactics used by staff or even followers.
This researcher chose to code “negative events misrepresented” and “condemning
the condemner” as separate strategies instead of types of justification tactics because they
were not used while accepting responsibility. Future studies may test the use of these two
tactics to determine if they are more commonly used to argue misrepresentation or
condemn condemners while not accepting responsibility.
Evangelical organizations tend to use spiritual language, references to God, and
Scripture in their impression management messages. These concepts are unfamiliar to
social science literature on OIM. Future research might create a taxonomy of OIM that is
unique to evangelical organizations and incorporates some of these spiritual dynamics.
Lastly, some tactics like prosocial behavior and organizational promotion were
applied in different ways. Future research might develop a more complex taxonomy that
includes deeper levels of sub-categories.
Conclusion
This study contributes to OIM research by examining OIM strategies used in the wake of
an image-threatening event by organizations within a field that until now had not been
studied. Understanding OIM strategies used by organizations like churches that are often
in the public eye can offer valuable input into how organizations that serve the public can
focus their efforts to respond well to a crisis in ways that do not prioritize their image.
Many organizations and leaders throughout the world are facing exposure and having to
respond to the crisis of a scandal. Therefore, research on how OIM strategies are used to
182
manage impressions is both timely and relevant. This research adds significant value to
both the social science literature base on organizational impression management and to
the evangelical community.

183
APPENDIX A
REPORTS OF PROTESTANT PASTORS

CHARGED WITH A CRIME IN THE YEARS 2016-2017
Table 14
Reports of Evangelical Church Leaders Charged with a Crime in the Years 2016-2017
No. Source Name Crime Position Organization
Body of Christ
Jackson Edward Domestic violence
1 Pastor Church; Milan,
Sun, 2016 Lewis against girlfriend
TN
Grace Hills
Brandon
Sexual assault of Youth Church;
2 Coker, 2016 Ernis Lee
five boys Pastor Newport Beach,
McDade
CA
Evangelical
Mabilog, Daniel Theft of church
3 Pastor Rock Church;
2016 Lampaglia funds
New York, NY
Sweet Pilgrim
Earnest Missionary
4 Jones, 2016 Sexual battery Pastor
Blount, Jr. Baptist Church;
Hattiesburg, MS
Taking indecent Jonas Ridge

Faherty, Jude D.
5 liberties with a Pastor Baptist Church;
2016 Hughes
student Elk Park, NC
Zion Lutheran
O’Neil, Kale
6 Conspiracy Pastor Church;
2016 Hanson
Bethalto, IL
Rape, institutional
sexual assault, Calvary
endangering the Fellowship
Jacob
7 Craig, 2016 welfare of a child, Pastor Church;
Malone
corruption of Downingtown,
minors, furnishing PA
liquor to minors
184
Five counts of
lustful touching of
a child; five counts
Christopher of enticing a child Evergreen
WDAM7,
8 Donald under 18 years of Pastor Baptist Church;
2016
Beam age with an Shubuta, MS
electronic device
for sexual
purposes
Oak Hill
Demarcus Receipt of child Missionary
9 Jones, 2016 Pastor
Smith pornography Baptist Church;
Memphis, TN
The Church at
Producing
Thornton, Ryan Lance Youth Mercy Hill;
10 pornography with
2016 Roberson Pastor Rainbow City,
a person under 17
AL
The Miracle
Second-degree
NBC Center of Faith
Michael C. assault; fourth-
11 Washington Pastor Missionary
Turner degree sex offense
2016 Baptist; Capitol
and harassment
Heights, MD
Calvary Baptist
WITN, Timothy Larceny by Church;
12 Pastor
2016 Stallings employee Elizabeth City,
NC
Two counts of
criminal sexual
Cedrone, misconduct; one Greenville
13 Arthur Lehr Pastor
2016 count of engaging County, SC
a minor for sexual
performance
First degree rape;

Joseph first degree New Banklick
Youth
14 Webb, 2016 Niemeyer, sodomy; first Baptist Church;
Pastor
Jr. degree sexual Walton, KY
abuse
185
First Baptist
KTEN, Ten counts of
15 Willie Tiller Pastor Church East;
2016 forgery
Ardmore, OK
Child
NBC New Vicitacio endangerment;
16 Pastor Union City, NJ
York, 2016 Rivas-Valle criminal sexual
contact
Zion Hill Baptist

McCall, George
17 Child sexual abuse Pastor Church;
2016 Waddles
Chicago, IL
7 counts of rape; 2
counts of sexual
battery; 2 counts
of unlawful sexual
conduct with a
minor; 3 counts of Old Emory
WSAZ-TV, Dennis
18 gross sexual Pastor Church; Jackson
2016 Wright
imposition; 1 County, OH
count of illegal use
of a minor in
nudity-oriented
material or
performance
Annoying or
Mt. Sinai
Moreno, Marquis molesting a child Youth
19 Church;
2016 Kidd under the age of Pastor
Pomona, CA
18
Sexual assault; Calvary Temple

indecent assault of Holiness
Marroni, Raymond P.
20 a person less than Pastor Church; South
2016 Buhrow
13; corruption of Middleton
minors Township, PA
Christopher 2 counts of Fairview

Humbles, Youth
21 Douglas statutory rape by Church;
2016 Pastor
Ross an authority figure Lebanon, TN
186
Goodyear
David 2 counts of sexual Youth
22 Favre, 2016 Baptist Church;
Thorne battery of a minor Pastor
Picayune, MS
Mt. Olive
First degree
Missionary
23 Ruch, 2016 Keith Frye statutory rape of a Pastor
Baptist Church;
child under 12
Lilbourn, MO
Believers
Mencarini, Child sexual Youth Christian
24 Chad Apsey
2016 assault Pastor Church; Eagle,
MI
Promoting a
sexual
performance of a Numerous
child less than 17 churches in NY.
WGRZ, Scott D. Youth
25 years old; Ran youth center
2016 Stockton Pastor
Possessing a called: YOU.
sexual ONLY BETTER
performance of a
child
2 counts of child
Versailles
seduction; 2
Rodney Youth Church of
26 Zilka, 2016 counts of
Matthews Pastor Christ;
possession of child
Versailles, IN
pornography
Continuous sexual
Daniel Unidentified
abuse; lewd or Youth
27 Kim, 2016 James church in Santa
lascivious acts Pastor
Moreno Maria, CA
against a child
2 felony counts of First Baptist

Franklin, Jody Assistant
28 lewd or indecent Church; Duncan,
2016 Hilliard Pastor
acts with a child OK
First United
Farmer, Sexual assault of Youth Methodist
29 Willie Bell
2016 three young boys Pastor Church; Cedar
Hill, TX
187
1 count of sexual
Grace Walk
abuse; 9 counts of Youth
30 Enea, 2016 Robert Jerez Church;
sexual conduct Pastor
Tolleson, AZ
with a minor
Child enticement;
using a computer
to facilitate a child Hope Lutheran
Joshua
31 Smith, 2016 sex crime; causing Pastor Church; Twin
Scheil
a child under 13 to Lakes, WI
view sexual
activity
Child sexual abuse

(previously Kingdom
WGN Web Raphael
32 convicted of child Pastor Church; North
Desk, 2016 Robinson
sexual abuse in Aurora, IL
2004)
Judah House of
Indecent liberties Prayer
WCCB
with a child; International
33 Charlotte, Ahmad Lee Pastor
assault on a child World
2016
under 12 Ministries;
Monroe, NC
Stole more than

Corey $250,000 in tithes Second African
Bynum,
34 Megill and offerings over Pastor Baptist Church;
2016
Brown the course of 10 Savannah, GA
years
70 counts of
distributing,
Cornerstone
possessing or
Lanning, David G. Bible
35 viewing of matter Pastor
2016 Reynolds Fellowship;
depicting sexually
Sherwood, AR
explicit conduct
involving a child
Kenneth New Hope

Markus,
36 Darrell Sexual assault Pastor Baptist Church;
2016
Worley Salisbury, NC
188
3 counts of
aggravated sexual
assault; 2 counts Colonial
Woo and
Alan Wayne of indecent Christian
37 Monfort, Pastor
Little liberties; 2 counts Church; Colonial
2016
of aggravated Heights, VA
sexual battery with
a minor
Unidentified
Child sexual abuse
38 Eucce, 2016 Cesar Lopez Pastor church; Avoca,
of two girls
AR
6 charges The Grace Place

Jeffrey
involving child Youth Community
39 Ivice, 2016 Bryan
sexual abuse and Pastor Church; Stuart,
Mobley
child pornography FL
3 counts of sexual Emmanuel

Kasarda, Timothy Youth
40 misconduct with a Baptist Church;
2016 Lawrence Pastor
minor South Haven, IN
Sex abuse of a
Hendren, Robert Henrietta Church
41 child-continuous- Pastor
2016 Todd Davis of Christ; TX
victim under 14
Lifehouse
Jacobs, Zubin Percy Human trafficking Creative
42 Church; Oak
2016 Parakh of a child Pastor
Ridge, TN
Grace Baptist
Jacobs, Jason Human trafficking Children
43 Church;
2016 Kennedy of a child Pastor
Knoxville, TN
Greater
Stewart, Rocky 2 counts of child Pastor Dimensions
44
2016 Walker physical abuse (former) Church; Pauls
Valley, OK
19 counts of
Battery Park
Mitchell, Christopher possession and
45 Pastor Baptist Church;
2016 Alan Hogge distribution of
VA
child pornography
189
1 count of incest;
1 count of second-
Youth Christ Episcopal
Jordan, degree sexual
46 James Lilly Pastor Church;
2016 assault; 31 counts
(former) Bluefield, WV
of first-degree
sexual abuse
Parascandola New Mount Zion

47 and Sit, James Love Child molestation Pastor Baptist Church;
2016 Brooklyn, NY
Prohibited use of
an electronic
First Christian
WDRB David communication
Church;
48 Media, James system for the Pastor
Jeffersonville,
2016 Brown purpose of
IN
procuring a minor
for a sex offense
Queen City
First-degree
Randall, George Christian
49 sodomy involving Pastor
2016 Bradburn Church; Queen
a teen
City, MO
2 counts of Jennie’s Chapel

unlawful United
LEX 18, George
50 imprisonment and Pastor Methodist
2016 Wayne Cole
first-degree child Church;
sexual abuse Windsor, KY
6 counts of Three Rivers

Crawford, James
51 criminal sexual Pastor Bible Church;
2016 Bailey
conduct Three Rivers, MI
5 counts of lewd
and lascivious
Openwater
Lambert, Samuel behavior with a Youth
52 Church; Odessa,
2016 Sutter victim age 12 to Pastor
FL
16; 5 counts of
sexual battery
190
5 counts of first-
El Shaddai AOH
Gregory degree child
53 Snell, 2016 Pastor Church; Dixons
Lucy sexual abuse and
Mill, AL
attempted rape
Fraudulently
received more
than $60,000 in Mt. Hopewell
WTVF, Clinton
54 state grant money Pastor Baptist Church;
2016 Lewis
for a fake Nashville, TN
addiction recovery
program
Second degree
Unidentified
Bailey, Lionel sexual assault of a Youth
55 church near
2016 McFadden minor; risk of Pastor
Hamden, CT
injury to a minor
Aggravated assault
and aggravated
Redemptive Life
Taylor, Damond rape of a family
56 Pastor Church;
2016 Roker member;
Memphis, TN
tampering with
evidence
Impregnated a 10-
year old girl;
charged with
sexual battery on a Unidentified
Raymond child under 12; Youth church in
57 Diaz, 2016
Vincent lewd and Pastor Pompano Beach,
lascivious conduct FL
(was previously
expelled from
Haiti)
191
Rape, sodomy,
and unlawful
sexual penetration
Mauricio Our Father’s
Matsumoto, of a juvenile
58 Aguilera- Pastor House; Salem,
2016 (previously
Garcia OR
convicted of
sexual abuse in
1985)
Statutory sodomy; Parkade Baptist

KMIZ, Dale Youth
59 promoting child Church;
2016 Johnson Pastor
pornography Columbia, MO
Walk of Faith
Child sexual
Hyman, Walter Church of
60 assault; risk of Pastor
2016 Williams Christ; New
injury to a minor
Haven, CT
Grace
Felony aggravated
Revolution
indecent liberties
61 Rizzo, 2016 Jay Preston Pastor Church of the
with a child under
Nazarene; Paola,
14
KS
Sexually Unidentified
Shadrock, Edgar Youth
62 assaulting a church in San
2016 Gonzales Pastor
teenage girl Antonio, TX
4 counts of child Bellingham

Hutton, Christopher Youth
63 rape in the second Baptist Church;
2016 L. Trent Pastor
degree Bellingham, WA
Burglary of
New Hope
another church;
Luciano, Community
64 David Utt criminal damage Pastor
2016 Church; Canton,
to a place of
IL
worship
Iglesia de Dios
Weaver, Jose Luis Aggravated sexual Nuevo
65 Pastor
2016 Pizarro assault of a child Amanecer;
Mansfield, TX
192
Rozelle, Dillon Robbery (of a Unidentified

66 Pastor
2016 Russell Walmart store) church in AR
Lake Highlands
Receiving and
Chad Baptist Church;
67 Sims, 2016 possessing child Pastor
Calhoun Sulphur Springs,
pornography
TX
Criminal sexual
Myfox8, James Brian Campus Summit Church;
68 conduct with a
2016 Briley Pastor Greenville, SC
minor
2 felony counts of Grace

KPNX, Christopher voyeurism and Youth Fellowship
69
2016 Santos unlawful recording Pastor Church;
of a minor Buckeye, AZ
Receipt of
material involving Shiloh Christian
Raghuveer, Gerald
70 the sexual Pastor Union Church;
2016 Searle
exploitation of a Delta, OH
child
Assault,
obstructing official
Mark W. Connection The Dwelling
71 Dunn, 2016 business, carrying Pastor
Howington Place
a concealed
weapon
8 counts of
photographing Worship
people without and Downtown
72 Blair, 2016 Rick Trotter their consent Creative Church;
(filming women Arts Memphis, TN
during church Pastor
services)
Arrested twice for Anchor Church,

Pastor,
child sexual Heritage Baptist,
Former
Walsh, David assault; violation Trinity Baptist,
73 Youth
2016 Farren of mandatory and Faith Church
Pastor
reporting in Texarkana,
requirements AR
193
Unlawful St. Stephan’s

Nelson, surveillance Episcopal
74 Adam Egan Pastor
2016 (filming woman in Church; Delmar,
changing room) NY
Aggravated sexual Unidentified

Dell Ivan assault of a child; Youth church in
75 Stone, 2016
Godkin sexual assault of Pastor Montgomery
multiple teens County, TX
2 counts of
Jordan indecent liberties Youth The Life Church;
76 Carey, 2016
Baird with a minor by a Pastor Manassas, VA
custodian
Greenwich
Indecent liberties
Derrick Youth Presbyterian
77 Carey, 2016 with a minor by a
Trump Pastor Church;
custodian
Nokesville, VA
3 counts of
Fortier and felonious sexual The Dialogue
Stephen
78 Underwood, assault with a Pastor Church;
Jesmer
2016 minor; 1 count of Manchester, NH
witness tampering
4 counts of
soliciting sexual
Immanuel
Stewart, Brian conduct or Youth
79 Baptist Church;
2016 Burchfield communication Pastor
Shawnee, OK
with a minor by
use of technology
Child molestation; Unidentified

Hanson,
80 Ken Adkins aggravated child Pastor church in
2016
molestation Jacksonville, GA
Lee Heights
WHNT, Christopher Fraudulent use of
2016 Barnett a credit card
Florence, AL
194
Judah House of
Indecent liberties Praise
WBTV, with a child; International
82 Ahmed Lee Pastor
2016 assault on a child World
under 12 Ministries;
Monroe, NC
Multiple counts of
child rape, abuse,
and gross sexual Lighthouse
Astolfi, Richard
83 imposition Pastor Baptist Church;
2016 Mick
involving multiple Sandusky, OH
female and male
victims
3 counts of rape of
Bible Truth
Sorrell, David Lee a child; 6 counts
2016 St. John aggravated sexual
Bristol, TN
battery
Possessing and Los Alamos’

Carrillo, Paul
85 distributing child Pastor First Baptist
2016 Cunningham
pornography Church; NM
Traveling to meet First United

David a minor after using Methodist;
86 Gore, 2016 Pastor
Hoppenjan a computer to lure Church of Pace,
a child FL
9 counts of
disseminating
child pornography;
10 counts of
Montandon
Stevens, Thomas possessing child
2016 Marker pornography; 1
PA
count of criminal
use of a
communication
device.
First Baptist
2 counts of child
88 Azar, 2016 Adair Krack Pastor Church;
molestation
Portland, OR
195
Unlawful sexual First Christian

Pefley, Wesley Associate
89 activity with a Church; Vera
2016 Weaver Pastor
minor Beach, FL
Child rape; Pastor The Garden

Belser, Danny
90 aggravated child and recovery center;
2016 Wells
molestation Director Atlanta, GA
Child rape; sexual Church of the

Hogan, Michael
91 grooming of a Pastor Living God;
2016 Jenkins
minor Helena, AR
Child sexual abuse

Jose Inglesia Impacto
Drakeford, of at least five
92 Vincente Pastor De Fe; Phoeniz,
2016 victims over 30
Morales AZ
years
Sexual assault on a
child; sexual
assault on a child
Robert Agape Bible
as a pattern of Assistant
93 Miller, 2016 Duane Church;
conduct; sexual Pastor
Wyatt Thornton, CO
assault on a child
by a person in a
position of trust
Light of the
Cortez, Gregory Aggravated assault World Christian
94 Pastor
2016 Varney of daughter Center; Topeka,
KS
Purchasing sizable St. James

Dr. Kehheth
Attanasio, amount of Missionary
95 K. Dubose, Pastor
2016 marijuana and Baptist Church;
Sr.
crack cocaine Norwalk, CT
196
Keeping a
gambling house;
Christian Raburn
serving alcohol to
Ministries;
WFTV, Christian a person younger
96 Pastor Church of
2016 Raburn than 21;
Victory; Winter
contributing to the
Garden, FL
delinquency of a
minor
Mount Bethel
Sexual battery of a
Swirko, Murrvin Missionary
97 victim under the Pastor
2016 Sheppard Baptist Church;
age of 12
Micanopy, FL
Open Door True

Alvin Child sexual Worship
Harper,
98 Norman abuse; first degree Pastor Apostolic
2016
McNeil rape; sodomy Church; Mobile,
AL
Sexual assault on a Southeast

Bolton, Christopher child by a person Youth Christian
99
2016 Hutchinson in a position of Pastor Church; Parker,
trust CO
Press Director Youth Haven

Lucas
100 Herald, Child sexual abuse of Ministry;
Savage
2016 Ministries Canaan, ME
Augustaville
Beauge, Gregory L. Failure to report Wesleyan
101 Pastor
2016 Clendaniel child sexual abuse Church; Paxinos,
PA
12 counts lewd
Morello Avenue
acts on a minor;
Baptist Church;
10 counts
Veklerov, Fernando Grace Bible
102 unlawful sexual Pastor
2016 Maldonado Church of
intercourse with a
Pleasant Hill;
minor; 1 count
CA
sodomy of a minor
197
Unidentified
Robertson, Ramon 2 counts of sexual Associate
103 church in Laurel,
2016 Porter battery Pastor
MS
Sending
pornographic Central Church
Holley, Casey Youth
104 pictures and of Christ;
2016 Haynes Pastor
videos to several Moore, OK
teens
First degree child

First Baptist
Woolington, molestation;
105 Adair Krack Pastor Church;Hoquiam
2016 second degree
, WA
child molestation
Straight Gate
Moreno and Ted First degree
106 Pastor Ministry;
Sobol, 2016 Merchant murder
Chicago, IL
Oregon-Idaho
Conference of
Production of
James Pastor, the United
Hernandez, child pornography;
107 Coleman Executive Methodist
2016 transportation of
Parkhurst Director Church Camp
child pornography
and Retreat
Ministry
Felony
intimidation; Calvary Baptist
CBSNEWS, Bobby
108 misdemeanor Pastor Church; New
2016 Slagle
resisting law Castle, IN
enforcement
All Saints
William 6 counts of
KARE11, Associate Lutheran
109 Leonard possession of child
2016 Pastor Church; Cottage
Helker pornography
Grove, MN
198
84 counts of
statutory sexual
Faith Brethren
Wesley assault; 84 counts Youth
110 Wang, 2016 Bible Church;
Blackburn of indecent Pastor
New Paris, PA
assault; corruption
of minors
Terry $1.2 million Victorous Life

111 Watts, 2016 Wayne congregation fraud Pastor Church;
Millender scheme Alexandra, VA
Princeton First
Aaron 5 counts of
Freeman Jr., Youth Assembly of
112 Thomas indecent liberties
2016 Pastor God; Princeton,
Payne with a child
WV
Sexual battery,
New Birth
touching a child
Community
Moore, Jonathan for lustful
113 Pastor Church
2016 Tucker purposes,
(Baptist); New
enticement of a
Albany, MS
child for sex
2 counts of sexual
battery by an
authority figure; 2
Jeremy Spoken Word
WATE6, counts of Assistant
114 Hugh Ministry Church;
2016 continuous sexual Pastor
McDowell Ten Mile, TN
abuse of a child; 1
count of rape of a
child
First Israel
African
Edward
115 Lyons, 2016 Welfare fraud Pastor Methodist
Smart
Episcopal;
Albany, NY
199
Human
trafficking; false
imprisonment, Good News
NBC
prostitution; Youth Little River
116 Miami, Ron Cooper
sexual activity Pastor Baptist Church;
2016
with a minor South Florida
(ran sex
trafficking ring)
DaySpring
Assembly of
Sexual
Kevin God Church and
117 Rood, 2016 exploitation by a Pastor
Grimes Director of
counselor
Dream Center;
Spencer, IA
Burglarized homes
of church Trinity Lutheran
Delage, Jon
118 members to steal Pastor Church;
2016 Paquette
prescription Birchwood, WI
medications
Victory
Morgante, Raul Diaz Three counts of Outreach
119 Pastor
2016 Moreno attempted murder Church; Merced,
CA
Mitchell Church
WBIW, Felony child Youth
120 Gary Spear of Christ;
2016 seduction Pastor
Mitchell, IN
Ronald The Body of

Kragie and Child sexual
121 Wayne Pastor Christ Ministry;
Glenn, 2016 assault
Mitchell Magnolia, TX
Tabernacle of
Prayer and
Sexual battery of a
Samuel Youth Miracles
122 Lotan, 2016 child under the age
Pierre Pastor International
of 12; kidnapping
Church;
Orlando, FL
200
Addiction
50 counts of child
Counseling Restore
sex exploitation;
Abusaid, Dwight Pastor; Ministries,
123 “One of Georgia’s
2016 Watson Director of HopeQuest
most active child
Ministry Ministry
porn consumers.”
Replication
Courts of
Praise
Ferrise, David
124 Rape of a child Pastor Church;
2016 Mathis
Cleveland,
OH
Greater St.
3 counts of
James
domestic battery
Temple
Abderholden, Torrance causing bodily
125 Pastor Church of
2016 Markham harm; interference
God in
with a report of
Christ;
domestic violence
Chicago, IL
Child molestation, New Bridge

Nicholas statutory rape, Church,
126 Noll, 2016 Youth Pastor
Kelley aggravated sexual Lawrenceville,
battery GA
Sexual misconduct
Old Fashion
with a minor;
United
vicarious sexual
Walker, Terry Baptist
127 gratification with a Pastor
2016 Dobbs Church;
minor; child
Yorktown,
exploitation; and
IN
child solicitation
3 counts of first-
degree sexual First Baptist
Freeman, Kenneth abuse; 1 count of Church of
128 Youth Pastor
2016 Leo Baker second-degree Ashland,
unlawful sexual OR
penetration
201
Lewd or lascivious Unidentified

Musallam, Oscar acts with a child church in
129 Pastor
2016 Rodriguez younger than 14 Stockton,
years of age CA
Sienna
Ranch
Multiple charges
KHOU-TV, Daniel Assistant Baptist
130 of sexual assault
2016 Carrel Pastor Church;
of a minor
Missouri
City, TX
Light of the
World
Trafficking a
Family of
LEX18, Jason controlled
131 Pastor Believers
2016 Green, Sr. substance
Church;
(heroine)
Lexington,
KY
Christ
5 counts of Reformed
Stoiber, Thomas molestation of a Baptist
132 Pastor
2016 Chantry child; 2 counts of Church;
aggravated assault Hales
Corners, WI
Bethlehem
James 2 counts of sexual Baptist
Remkus, Children’s
133 Vernon abuse of a child Church;
2016 Minister
McNeal younger than 12 Hazel
Green, AL
Harbor
United
Tyler Indecent liberties
WVAY Methodist
134 Simkus with a child Youth Pastor
News, 2016 Church;
Smither younger than 12
Wilmington,
NC
202
The Journey
1 count of lewd or Church
Cutway, Nathan Youth
135 lascivious (Baptist);
2016 Gorzelanczyk Counselor
molestation Orange City,
FL
Criminal attempt
Bell Street
to commit child
Randy Church of
WTOC, molestation;
136 Wade Pastor God;
2016 solicitation for
Rowell Hazlehurst,
sexual conduct
GA.
with a child
2 counts of
second-degree and
Good News
third-degree
Dong Wook Church;
137 Jany, 2017 assault; 1 count of Pastor
Kim Minneapolis
malicious
MN
punishment of a
child
14 counts of lewd
Bethel
and lascivious
WFTV, Baptist
138 Jon Schils battery on a victim Youth Pastor
2016 Church;
between the ages
Cocoa, FL
of 12 and 16
Corruption of
minors; indecent
First Baptist
assault without
WPXI, Zachary Church;
139 consent; indecent Youth Pastor
2016 Hertlein Fairchance,
assault of a person
PA
less than 16 years
of age
Genesis
Baptist
Walker, Gene 2 counts of assault
140 Pastor Church;
2016 Edwards on a female
China
Grove, NC
203
Columbia
Road Baptist
10 counts of
Morice, Brian A. Church;
141 sexual battery Youth Pastor
2016 Mitchell North
against a minor
Olmsted,
OH
Possession of
child sexually Church on
Arsenault,
142 David Diehl abusive material; Pastor Fire; Grand
2016
using a computer Rapids, MI
to commit a crime
Crossroad
Michael Theft; theft Christian
Cephas,
143 Shawn scheme; Pastor Church; St.
2016
Holcomb embezzlement Leonard,
MD
1 count of second
degree assault; Good News
third degree Church;
144 Jany, 2017 Dong Kim Pastor
assault; malicious Minneapolis
punishment of a MN
child
Galilee
Episcopal
Youth Pastor/
Mitchell, Jeffrey Church;
145 Child sexual abuse Executive
2017 Bondi Young Life;
Director
Virginia
Beach, VA
Community
Baldas, Fraud ($555K Christian
146 Julius Baker Pastor
2017 credit card fraud) Fellowship;
Detroit, MI
4 counts sexual Gospel

Simeon, Christover battery involving a Assistant Baptist
147
2017 Stivers teenage church Pastor Church;
member Poland, OH
204
Attempted
aggravated sexual
Jody exploitation of a Freedom
Worship
148 Beres, 2017 Dwayne minor; unlawful Church;
Leader
Brown photography in Gallatin, TN
violation of
privacy
3 counts indecent
contact with a
child; 2 counts
indecent exposure; Dallas
4 counts third- Center
degree sex abuse; Church of
Randy
149 Ta, 2017 1 count lascivious Pastor the
Johnson
acts with a child; 2 Brethren;
counts assault with Dallas
intent to commit Center, IA
sex abuse; 1 count
child
endangerment.
Mount Olive
Severely beating a Baptist
Gutierrez, Floyd
150 75 year-old church Pastor Church;
2017 Sullivan
member Kansas City,
MO
Cornerstone
Kendrick, Mark Solicitation of
151 Pastor Assembly;
2017 Brooke prostitution
Ward, AR
9 counts of
robbery with a
True Love
dangerous
John Church of
Gunderman, weapon; 9 counts
152 Thomas Pastor Refuge;
2017 conspiracy to
Lindsey Charlotte,
commit robbery
NC
with a dangerous
weapon
205
Felony assault by Revolution

Hocutt, Micah D. strangulation; Church;
153 Pastor
2017 Wright misdemeanor Wilmington,
assault on a female NC
1 count of second- Fox River

degree sexual Christian
Taylor, Peter
154 assault against a Pastor Church;
2017 Knebel
child (10 year-old Waukesha,
girl in his office) WI
Failing to pay
taxes; filing false Rockwealth
WSOCTV, Todd Pastor and
155 tax returns; hiding Ministries;
2017 Coontz televangelist
assets paid for by NC
donations
2 charges of Peoria
Benjamin aggravated sexual Baptist
McFarland,
156 William assault of a child; Pastor Church;
2017
Nelson 1 charge of deadly Hillsboro,
conduct TX
City of Life
Worship and
Tepfer, William Third-degree Deliverance
157 Pastor
2017 Marshall larceny Center;
Bridgeport,
CT
Possession child
sexually abusive
material; 2 counts
surveillance of an
Harbor
unclothed person;
9&10News, Benoni Springs;
158 2 counts Youth Pastor
2017 Enciso Boyne City,
using/installing an
MI
eavesdropping
device, using a
computer to
commit a crime
206
Restoration
Lewd and
Pastor; Church and
Samuel lascivious
159 Holt, 2017 School School;
Vidal molestation of a
Principal Palm Bay,
child
FL
Mountain
Aggravated
View
statutory rape;
Independent
WBIR, Jimmy E. statutory rape by
160 Pastor Baptist
2017 Orick authority figure;
Church;
sexual battery by
LaFollette,
authority figure
TN
2 counts of rape; 1
Bethlehem
count sexual
Baptist
WBBJ, battery. (Accused
161 Mike Ulmer Pastor Church;
2017 of tying up and
Henderson,
raping 18 year-old
TN
woman)
Christ
Rape, sodomy, Fellowship
KATU, Michael
162 and child sex Pastor Church;
2017 Lewis
abuse Grants Pass,
OR
Broadway
Baptist
Albert Sexual assault of a
163 Romo, 2017 Youth Pastor Church;
Lavador, Jr. child under 17
Houston,
TX
Elizabeth
United
Reeves, Michael Methodist
164 Statutory rape Youth Pastor
2017 Todd Jansco Church;
Smithfield,
NC
207
10 counts second- ACTS

Woodworth, Andrew degree sex abuse Ministry;
165 Youth Pastor
2017 Stutzman involving a 16 Silverton,
year-old girl OR
First Baptist
The
Thomas Church of
166 Republic, Battery Pastor
Collett Taylorsville,
2017
IN
Grace Point
Church of
Robert Misdemeanor the
Associate
167 Blest, 2017 Donald count of failure to Nazarene;
Pastor
Smith report child abuse Clay
Township,
PA
22 counts lewd Westside

James
Schultz, and lascivious Church of
168 Gladwell Pastor
2017 conduct with a Redding,
Crawford
child CA
Perpetual
Amity,
WREX, Solicitation of Retired
169 Dan Stovall Belvidere;
2016 prostitution Pastor
Sycamore,
IL
First United
David Aggravated sexual
Methodist
170 Blair, 2017 Michael assault of a 5 year- Pastor
Church;
Akin old girl
Texarna, TX
Munger
Felony theft of Avenue
171 Miles, 2017 Wade Davis 500K of church Pastor Baptist
money Church;
Dallas, TX
208
First and second- Legions of

degree child Christ
WLNE-TV,
172 Roy Bolden molestation; third- Pastor Ministries;
2017
degree sexual Providence,
assault RI
First
Insurance fraud
Christian
(staged home
Church;
burglary to pay
McCutcheon, Columbus,
173 Justin White drug debt); Pastor
2017 IN; Still
contributing to the
Waters
delinquency of a
Church;
child
Camby, IN
Murder and
Counselor; Crosswater
McLaughlin Ronnie dismemberment of
174 Former Community
2017 Leon Hyde 16-year old boy in
Youth Pastor Church
1994
Third Place
Community
Foundation
Remer, Ronald Pastor; Church;
175 Child pornography
2017 Robinson Adjunct Turley, OK;
Phillips
Theological
Seminary
Iglesia
2 counts child
Pentecostes
Elias S. molesting; 1 count
176 Paul, 2017 Pastor Evangelica;
Rosales attempted child
Lafayette,
molesting
IN
7 counts predatory
and criminal Palabra Miel
sexual assault; (Hispanic
Jensen, Jose Luis
177 aggravated Pastor church);
2017 Aboytes
criminal sexual Macon
abuse of a girl County, GA
under 13
209
The Intimidation and Edinburgh

Larry
178 Republic, resisting law Pastor Wesleyan
Biddle
2017 enforcement Church, IN
Salem
2 counts
Baptist
Ferrell, Zachary pornography
179 Youth Pastor Church;
2017 Almarode involving
Stonewall,
juveniles
LA
Sexual Grace
Schmidt, Joel M. exploitation by a Community
180 Youth Pastor
2017 Waltz counselor or Church;
therapist Boone, IA
Grace House
Kaiser and Misdemeanor Ministries;
181 Joshua Ball Pastor
Tyree, 2017 assault and battery Bedford,
VA
Wheelwright
Distributing matter
Baptist
WYMT, portraying sex
182 David Boyd Pastor Church;
2017 performance by a
Floyd
minor
County, KY
New
Credit card theft; Ebenezer
Thompson, Robert
183 money laundering; Pastor Baptist
2017 David Keith
forgery Church;
Newark, NJ
Faith
Rowland Failing to report or Tabernacle
184 Miller, 2017 George refer an incident of Pastor Church;
Foster child abuse Lebanon,
PA
Greater St.
Luke Baptist
Michael Criminal domestic
185 Davis, 2017 Pastor Church;
Baker violence
Columbia,
SC
210
Bellevue
Cardona
James Possession of Associate Baptist
186 and Famer,
Rankin child pornography Pastor Church;
2017
Hurst, TX
Southside
Violation of Baptist
Remkus, Michael
187 mandatory Pastor Church;
2017 Walker
reporting laws Hunstville,
AL
Receipt of corrupt
payments;
obstructing a
Hope
Gecan, Trevon regulatory
188 Pastor Cathedral;
2017 Gross investigation;
Jackson, NY
making false
statements to
regulators
Sexual abuse; Glynwood

facilitating the Baptist
Roney, John Edgar
189 travel of a child Youth Pastor Church;
2017 Harris
for an unlawful Prattville,
sex act AL
Kingdom
Harvest
Aggravated sexual
Harvey, Antonio Church
190 battery against two Pastor
2017 Jones International
juveniles
Roanoke,
VA
Beth-El
3 counts of sexual Farmworker
Paluska, Walter
191 battery (17 year- Pastor Ministry;
2017 Chuquimia
old girl) Wimauma,
FL
Abundant
Feehan, Cordell Sex trafficking of Life
192 Pastor
2017 Jenkins children Ministries;
Toledo, OH
211
Greater Life
Feehan, Anthony Sex trafficking of Christian
193 Pastor
2017 Haynes children Center,
Toledo, OH
Charlie Two local

Pelisek, 40 counts of child
194 Mabern Youth Pastor churches in
2017 sex abuse
Hamrick Florida
Sexual assault of a
Pinnacle
child; 2 counts of
Langston, Church;
195 Tate Pigg purchasing or Youth Pastor
2017 Amarillo,
furnishing alcohol
TX
to a minor
Irvington
Bible
Alesia and Robert Baptist
196 Drug production Pastor
Evans, 2017 Jaynes, Jr. Church;
Indianapolis,
IN
1 count third-
degree sexual
abuse; 2 counts
lascivious acts Parkview
Benjamin
KCRG, with a child; 3 Church;
197 Craig Youth Pastor
2017 counts indecent North
Tweedt
contact with a Liberty, IA
child; 2 counts
lascivious conduct
with a minor
Gethsemane
Invasion of
Lutheran
Wright, Terry privacy; criminal
198 Pastor Church;
2017 Herzberg attempt at invasion
Tannersville
of privacy
PA
Faith Baptist
Tandy Aggravated sexual
Caloway, Church;
199 Eugene battery (12 year- Pastor
2017 Maury
Roberts old girl)
County, TN
212
Trafficking Class
B drugs;
possession with
Mission
WCVB, Willie intent to distribute
200 Pastor Church;
2017 Wilkerson Class B drugs;
Boston, MA
possession with
intent to distribute
Class C drugs
Second-degree
arson; making Abundant
false claim to Faith
Julius
Townsend, obtain benefits for Lighthouse
201 Xavier Pastor
2017 fire loss; burning of Jesus
Banks
personal property Christ;
to defraud insure; Conway, SC
obstructing justice
North Coast
16 counts lewd
Calvary
Alford, Matthew and lascivious acts Assistant
202 Chapel;
2017 Tague with a person Pastor
Carlsbad,
under 14
CA
Second
Columbia Nazareth
Unlawful
Police Gene Autry Associate Baptist
203 possession of a
Department, Morris Pastor Church;
pistol
2017 Columbia,
SC
Asamblea
Apostolica
WSOC, Nicolas Molestation of Assistant
204 Church;
2017 Vasquez three young girls Pastor
Charlotte,
NC
213
3 counts of lewd
acts on a child 14
Saddleback
or 15 years old; 2 Jr. High
Zaimov, Ruven Church;
205 counts lewd or Youth
2017 Meulenberg Lake Forest,
lascivious acts Mentor
CA
with a minor
younger than 14
Memorial
United
Methodist;
Gegan, Cheong Criminal sexual
206 Pastor West Grove
2017 Park conduct
United
Methodist;
Neptune, NJ
Frist Church
SWVA
Donn Assault and of God;
207 Today, Pastor
Sunshine battery Wytheville,
2017
VA
Fellowship
United
Sexual battery
WTKR, Andre Associate Church of
208 with the intent to
2017 Leaphart Pastor Christ;
transmit infection
Chesapeake,
VA
Edgewood
Assembly of
God;
Youth Pastor;
Columbus,
WTVM, Homer (Jay) Child molestation Volunteer in
209 GA; The
2017 Singleton and sodomy Children’s
Refuge
Ministry
Church,
Waverly
Hall, GA
214
Sexual penetration
with a foreign El Senor
object of a Justicia
Victor
Bodley, juvenile under 16; Nuestra
210 Elizandro Pastor
2017 sexual penetration Church;
Tax-Gomez
with a foreign Menlo Park,
object of a CA
juvenile
Neglect of a
dependent in a
Unidentified
Fox News, Michael situation that Pastor
211 Church in
2017 Trosclair endangers the (former)
AL
dependent; public
intoxication
Grace
A.
Dowling, Paying for sexual Church of
212 Livingston Pastor
2017 conduct All Nations;
Foxworth
Boston, MA
Betania
KVUE, Ruben Sexual assault of a Associate Baptist
213
2017 Garcia child Pastor Church; East
Austin, TX
Possession of a Second
The Casey controlled Chance
Gregory Pastor;
214 County substance; Outreach;
Troutt Director
News, 2017 possession of Campbellsville
meth; DUI KY
Use of a computer
to facilitate a child
Employed at
sex crime, second-
KCII News, Scott Pastor several area
215 degree sexual
2017 Nesbitt (former) churches in
assault of a child,
Iowa
possession of child
pornography
215
First-degree Fountain of
larceny; second- Youth
Donahue, Franklin L.
216 degree forgery Pastor Cathedral;
2017 Fountain
(sold church to Bridgeport,
himself) CT
2 counts
kidnapping; 2
Mt. Hebron
counts false
Baptist
imprisonment;
Church;
feticide; 2 counts
Irondale,
aggravated assault; Pastor
AL; St.
possession of a (former);
Calvin Francis
Garrison, firearm during the Hospital
217 Eugene Hospital,
2017 commission of a Chaplain
Clopton Columbus,
crime; attempted (former);
GA;
rape; making Youth Pastor
Macedonia
terroristic threats;
Baptist
third-degree
Church;
cruelty to children;
Macon, GA
obstruction of a
911 call
Anona
Lewd and
Domenic United
WFTS, lascivious
218 Victor Youth Pastor Methodist
2017 molestation (14
Bisesti Church;
year-old girl)
Largo, FL
The
Woodlands
Moreno, Eddie Associate First Baptist
219 Prostitution
2017 Hilburn Pastor Church;
Woodlands,
TX
Praise
Chapel
WISHTV, Alexander Felony count of
220 Youth Pastor Church of
2017 Roesly child solicitation
God; Union
City, IN
216
Unidentified
Morgan, Clayton Indecent behavior
221 Youth Pastor church in
2017 Hand with a juvenile
Clinton, LA
Bethel
4 counts
Behlen, Joel Baptist
222 aggravated sexual Pastor
2017 Rumbaugh Church; La
assault of a child
Grange, TX
Sexual battery; Sembrador

Batchelor, Fernando promoting the De Fe
223 Youth Pastor
2017 Ponce performance of a Church;
child Miami, FL
Calvary
6 counts of sex
WTXL, Roshad Chapel;
224 offenses against a Youth Pastor
2017 Thomas Tallahassee,
child
TN
Sold Out
Michael
Felony domestic Church;
225 Hicks, 2017 “Derek” Pastor
battery Conway,
Jones
AR
Rape, sexual El Shadai

battery, 2 counts Church of
WSYX/WT Guillermo
226 gross sexual Pastor God;
TE 2017 Quintanilla
imposition (3 Columbus,
young girls) OH
Soliciting sexual Unidentified

Vendel, Timothy M. Volunteer
227 encounter with church in
2017 Myers Youth Pastor
child online PA
Omar Unidentified
KENS5, Sexual assault of a
228 Roman Youth Leader church in
2017 child
Salas TX
Iglesia
Centro
Beausoleil, Travis Christiano;
229 Sexual assault Youth Pastor
2017 Nichols West
Columbia,
TX
217
Video voyeurism;
Seven
lewd and
Rivers
Grunik, Chad lascivious Worship
230 Presbyterian
2017 Robison exhibition Director
Church;
(involving young
Lecanto, FL
girls)
Promoting
Care and
prostitution;
Short and Share
patronizing a Pastor;
231 Cardone, Jim Irwin Ministries;
prostitute; dealing Director
2017 Michiana,
in controlled
IN
substances
Tabernaculo
Jose 2 counts De Vida
Knodel,
232 Francisco continuous sexual Pastor Pentecostal
2017
Bernal abuse of a child Church; Fort
Worth, TX
First
Embezzling more Christian
Christopher
233 Perry, 2017 than $10k in Pastor Church;
L. Stansell
church funds Princeton,
NJ
Denman
Eric Third-degree Avenue
234 Bass, 2017 Thomas felony prescription Family Pastor Baptist
Garland fraud Church;
Lufkin TX
Rising Mt.
Zion Baptist
Roscoe Driving under the
235 Jones, 2017 Pastor Church;
Cooper III influence
Henrico
County, VA
Phillipsburg’s
Indecent liberties
First
KWCH, with a child;
236 David Pugh Pastor Assembly of
2017 sexual exploitation
God Church;
of a child
KS
218
Thompson-
237 Unidentified Prostitution Pastor Unidentified
Gee, 2017
Home
Molestation of a
French, Timothy church;
238 child (13 year-old Youth Pastor
2017 Peterkin Hillsborough
girl)
County, FL
13 counts felony
sexual offense
with a child; 11
counts felony
child abuse by Yadkin
committing a College
The-
Daniel Gene sexual act; 2 Baptist
239 Dispatch, Pastor
Little counts of felony Church;
2017
rape of a child; 2 Lexington,
counts felony SC
incest with a child
younger than 13;
indecent liberties
with a child
Forcibly touching Victory

Paul the sexual or other Church;
240 Orr, 2017 Pastor
Burress intimate parts of Rochester,
another person NY
Child abuse; false

McDonald, imprisonment; North
241 John Yelton Pastor
2017 communicating Carolina
threats after arrest
Theft by failure to Chippewa

Bogdan, Rodney E. make required United
242 Pastor
2017 Smith disposition of Methodist;
funds Mars, PA
Scheme to
Todd defraud; Cedar Key
Tummond,
243 Anthony forgery/uttering Pastor First Baptist
2017
Pope forged bank Church; FL
checks; grand theft
219
Howard
X95 Radio, Dennis A. Solicitation of a
244 Pastor Chapel;
2017 Myers sexual act
Opdyke, IL
Unidentified
Gross sexual
Anderson, Nikolay church;
245 imposition (10 Pastor
2017 Kalka Middleburg
year-old girl)
Heights, OH
God’s
Awesome
Army
Click 2
Hollis Continuous sexual Ministry; El
246 Houston, Pastor
Vaughn abuse of a child Shaddai
2017
World
Outreach
Church; TX
2 counts of
VanGilder, Daniel second-degree Unidentified
247 Youth Pastor
2017 Hoffman criminal sexual church; MI
conduct
Christ
Carrying a weapon
Townsend, Phillip Community
248 in a restricted Pastor
2017 Miles Church;
place
Conway, SC
3 counts child
molestation; 4 Rushville
WTHR,
249 Garry Evans counts sexual Pastor Baptist
2017
battery; 5 counts Church; IN
child solicitation
Kingdom
Encounter
Kenneth
Feehan, Family
250 Howard Sex trafficking Pastor
2017 Worship
Butler
Center;
Toledo, OH
220
Giving alcohol to First Baptist

Jared minors; Church;
251 Lane, 2017 Youth Pastor
Thomas inappropriately Ridge
touching a girl Manor, FL
St. Luke
United
Stunson and
Reid Methodist
252 Kocher, Child sexual abuse Pastor
Buchanan Church;
2017
Lexington,
KY
First Haitian
Community
Napoli, Ermonte
253 Prostitution Pastor Church;
2017 Moliere
Houston,
TX
Hope
Community
Impersonating an
Mullen, Keith Church;
254 officer; pepper Pastor
2017 Haskell Owatonna,
spraying a teen
Minneapolis
MN
NewLife
Attempted
Outreach
Rodney unlawful sexual
255 Coller, 2017 Youth Pastor Church; East
McManus conduct with a
Palestine,
minor
OH
Attempted
production of Apostolic
child pornography; Assembly
Stephen enticement of a Church;
Martinez,
256 Mendoza child to engage in Youth Pastor New Mexico
2017
Arellano sexual activity; Youth;
travel to meet a Albuquerque,
minor to engage in NM
sexual conduct
221
First United
Hawkins, Clint Sexual assault of Methodist
257 Youth Pastor
2017 Brackett child Church;
Lindale, TX
Unlawful
transaction with a
minor; illegal sex
act with a person
Restoration
under the age of
WCBI, Michael Life Church;
258 18; prohibited use Pastor
2017 Shane Cruse Hamilton,
of electronic
MS
communication
system to procure
a minor; sexual
offense
Grace
Naham, Christopher
259 Triple homicide Youth Pastor Lutheran
2017 Gattis
Church; OH
Several
Multiple counts of unidentified
Romello
260 Joyce, 2017 sexual assault on a Pastor churches;
Leach
child Colorado
Springs, CO
Parkview
Todd Shane Indecent liberties
261 Hopf, 2017 Pastor Church;
Tomko with a child
Quincy, VA
Sexual assault; Awaken

Torres, Elliot James indecency with a Church;
262 Youth Pastor
2017 Wickboldt child with sexual McAllen,
contact TX
222
Chosen
Generation
Pastor; Ministries;
Coleman, Lorenzo Youth
263 Domestic assault Executive
2017 Lawson Empowerment
Director Zone;
Columbia,
MO
Graham
Street
Possession or
Timothy Church of
264 Berge, 2017 promoting child Youth Pastor
Simon Christ;
pornography
Stephenville
TX
Fleming
News4Jax, James Island
265 Domestic battery Pastor
2017 Weldon Presbyterian
Church, FL
Worthless check;
Lent Emmaus
Strong, uttering a forged
266 Christopher Pastor Cathedral;
2017 instrument with
Carr Raeford, NC
false endorsements
First Baptist
9 counts second- Church and
Wicks, Lee Philip
267 degree sex abuse Pastor School;
2017 Wiegand
involving a minor Portland,
OR
Grace Bible
Gregory
268 Hart, 2017 Robbery; burglary Pastor Church; Las
Bolusan
Vegas, NV
Arrowbrook
Loitering to
WHIO, Daniel Baptist
269 engage in Pastor
2017 Williams Church;
solicitation
Xenia, OH
Child sexual Riverview

Counts, Blaine
270 assault Youth Pastor Church of
2017 Faircloth
(14 year-old girl) God, MI
223
Omaha
Klint Christ
KETV, Sexual assault (15
271 Andrew Youth Pastor Community
2017 year-old girl)
Bitter Church;
Omaha, NE
Jeffersonville
LEX18, William Social security
272 Pastor Assembly of
2017 Conn fraud
God; KY
Illegal
Cristo La
CBSLA, immigration;
273 Noe Carias Pastor Roca de
2017 Evading
Poder, CA
deportation
St. Mark
3 counts of AME;
Ellis W.
274 Olsen, 2017 criminal sexual Pastor Calvary
Simmons
conduct Baptist;
Duluth, MN
St. James
Possessing
Evangelical
Fairmont pornographic
Robert C. Lutheran
275 Sentinel, material involving Pastor
Trueblood Church;
2017 a minor on a work
Northrop,
computer
MN
Endangering the
Wells
welfare of a
Branch
dependent person;
Baptist
criminal restraint;
Church (aka
Buttarazzi, Peter W. criminal trespass;
276 Pastor Trinity
2017 Leon criminal mischief;
Coastal
theft of less than
Community
$500; sexual
Church),
assault against 15-
ME
year old girl
2 counts of First Baptist

Stefan
WTAP, distribution and Church;
277 Andrew Youth Pastor
2017 display to a minor Williamstown
Deliramich
of obscene matter WV
224
Unidentified
Ronald P. 3 counts of
278 Rieck, 2017 Pastor church in St.
Ewing statutory rape
Louis, MO
Morning
Grove
Quinton
Rape of a minor Associate Baptist
279 Askin, 2017 Tyrone
(17 year-old girl) Pastor Church;
Williams
Memphis,
TN
Broadway
2 counts obtaining
Mark Baptist
McCracken, money by false
280 Wayne Pastor Church;
2017 pretenses over
Miller Sand
$500
Springs, OK
1 count indecent
Life
behavior with
Tabernacle
KTBS, Edgar juveniles;
281 Pastor Church;
2017 McBride soliciting
Shreveport,
prostitution;
LA
resisting an officer
1 count aggravated
sexual assault; 3
Come Alive
McCrone, Harry L. counts sexual
282 Pastor Church;
2017 Thomas assault; 4 counts
Medford, NJ
endangering the
welfare of children
Endangering the
All Nations
welfare of a child
Church;
Manuel in the third degree;
283 Loyer, 2017 Pastor New
Mora criminal sexual
Brunswick,
contact in the
NJ
fourth degree
The
Third degree Unidentified
Fairfield Christopher
284 sexual assault (20- Youth Pastor church in
Ledger, Paul
year old man) Fairfield, IA
2017
225
Criminal sexual
Gregory
WCBD conduct with a Charleston,
285 “Kevin” Pastor
News, 2017 minor of second SC
Richardson
degree
Possession of
Comstock, Michael child pornography; Hopatcong,
286 Youth Leader
2017 DeBlock conveying obscene NJ
materials to a child
Sexually
McAllister, Cesar Panorama
287 assaulting 4 Youth Pastor
2017 Cartagena City, CA
minors
226
APPENDIX B
CODING RULES
The coding rules were developed by the researcher during the first two phases of
the research. These rules include instructions for coding, definitions and examples of
stakeholders, definitions and examples of OIM strategies, and rules. Possible rules
include:
1. Stakeholder Coding. The stakeholder type needs to be identified. Examples of
stakeholders include “congregation” and “student body.” Code more than one
stakeholder type when a unit of analysis indicates that more than one stakeholder
type is the target of the message. However, coding should attempt to be as
selective as possible. Use the “unknown” category for the stakeholder type only
when you are unable to make a reasonable judgement concerning the identity of
the target.
2. Impression Management Strategies. The impression management strategy needs
to be identified. Examples of IM strategies are “ingratiation” and “justification.”
Code more than one strategy in a unit of analysis if you determine that more than
one strategy is present. However, coding should attempt to be as selective as
possible. Only use the “other” category when you are unable to make a reasonable
judgment concerning the strategy being used, but you have reason to believe that
impression management behavior is present. If you use the “other” category,
please indicate in the coding form the specific statement(s) you are referring to.
227
When coding IM strategies that are sub-strategies, only select the sub-
strategy. For example, for denial of volition, only select denial of volition not both
denial of volition and justification.

228
APPENDIX C
CODING FRAME
The Coding Frame was developed by the researcher prior to coding. The frame
was incorporated into a content analysis software that included all media, excerpts for
coding, coding labels and definitions, and descriptors. The database presented the various
stakeholder types and OIM strategy types for each excerpt needing coding. The Coding
Frame was built off the following template:
Unit of Analysis: ________________

Organization: _____________________________________
The statement being coded is in response to some image-threatening event. Is the
statement addressed to:
{List of stakeholder types identified in data collection phase}
Date of Statement: ____________________

Statement is made in response to what issue: _____________________
The statement may be classified as:
Direct assertive OIM: Direct defensive OIM:

___Ingratiation ___Organizational handicapping
___Flattery ___Apology
___Opinion conformity ___Restitution
___Organizational promotion ___Prosocial behavior
___Intimidation ___References to historical practices
___Exemplification ___References to normative practices
___Supplication ___Comparison with industry practices
___Excuse
___Denial of intention Indirect assertive OIM:
___Denial of volition ___Boasting
___Denial of agency ___Blaring
___Justification ___Burnishing
___Denial of injury ___Blasting
___Denial of victim
___Condemning the condemner Indirect defensive OIM:
___Negative events misrepresented ___Burying
___Blurring
___Boosting
___Belittling
230
Clergy Crimes Reference List
A former Phillipsburg pastor is charged with sex crimes. (2017, August 23). KWCH 12.
Retrieved from http://www.kwch.com/content/news/Former-KS-pastor-charged-with-
child-sex-crimes-441572333.html
Abusaid, S. (2016, December 30). Canton man indicted on child porn charges. Tribune Ledger
News. Retrieved from http://www.tribuneledgernews.com/local_news/canton-man-
indicted-on-child-porn-charges/article_4914e556-cef5-11e6-b268-1b22b773db91.html
Abderholden, F. (2016, November 9). Alderman charged with domestic battery in North
Chicago. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-
county-news-sun/crime/ct-lns-north-chicago-alderman-arrested-st-1110-20161109-
story.html
Alabama pastor, wife arrested after bringing infant to bar, charged with being drunk. (2017, June
21). Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/21/alabama-pastor-
wife-arrested-for-bringing-infant-to-bar-partying-and-breastfeeding-while-drunk.html
Alesia, M., & Evans, T. (2017, April 17). 10 tons of drugs, 11 ½ years in prison for Indy pastor.
Indy Star. Retrieved from https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2017/04/17/spice-k2-
synthetic-drugs-homeland-security-baptist-church/100433972/
Alford, A. (2017, May 31). Carlsbad church pastor arrested on child molestation charges. CBS 8.
Retrieved from http://www.cbs8.com/story/35560762/carlsbad-church-pastor-arrested-
on-child-molestation-charges
Anderson, C. (2017, September 7). Elderly pastor gets 5 years in prison for groping young girl at
a Middleburg Heights pool. Cleveland 19. Retrieved from
http://www.cleveland19.com/story/36309319/elderly-man-sentenced-for-touching-
young-girl-at-a-middleburg-heights-pool
Arrest made in deadly Laurel Street shooting investigation. (2017, May 30). City of Columbia
Police Department. Retrieved from https://columbiapd.net/2017/05/30/arrest-made-
deadly-laurel-street-shooting-investigation/
Arsenault, C. (2016, November 23). “It hurts all religious communities”; GR pastor charged after
trying to meet child for sex. Fox 17. Retrieved from http://fox17online.com/2016/11/23
/it-hurts-all-religious-communities-grand-rapids-pastor-charged-after-trying-to-meet-
child-for-sex/
Askin, J. (2017, January 6). Minister charged with rape of teen. WMC Action News 5. Retrieved
from http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/34200527/minister-charged-with-rape-of-
teen
231
Assistant pastor at Roane County church charged with sexually assaulting 2 underage girls.
(2016, October 29). WATE 6. Retrieved from https://www.wate.com/news/local-
news/mcminn-county-man-faces-several-felony-charges/792863454
Astolfi, C. (2016, August 31). Sandusky pastor indicted again for child sex crimes. Sandusky
Register. Retrieved from http://www.sanduskyregister.com/story/201608300051
Attanasio, C. (2016, September 10). Norwalk pastor charged with buying crack cocaine. The
Hour. Retrieved from http://www.thehour.com/news/article/Police-say-Norwalk-pastor-
had-crack-cocaine-9213956.php
Azar, K. (2016, September 16). Pastor arrested for sexual abuse has Portland ties. KATU News.
Retrieved from http://katu.com/news/local/pastor-arrested-for-sexual-abuse-has-portland-
ties
Baldas, T. (2017, January 28). Detroit pastor falls from grace, gets prison for fraud run from
church. Detroit Free Press. Retrieved from https://www.freep.com/story/news/local
/michigan/detroit/2017/01/28/detroit-pastor-julius-baker-fraud/97156132/
Bass, G. (2017, August 29). Affidavit: Lufkin pastor committed prescription fraud to get 1k
canine pain killer pills. KTRE. Retrieved from http://www.ktre.com/story/36243706
/affidavit-lufkin-pastor-committed-prescription-fraud-to-get-1k-canine-pain-killer-pills
Batchelor, A. (2017, July 13). Youth pastor accused of sexual battery on 15-year-old girl. Local
10 News. Retrieved from https://www.local10.com/news/crime/youth-pastor-accused-of-
sexual-battery-on-15-year-old-girl
Beauge, J. (2016, September 7). Northumberland County pastor charged with not reporting
sexual abuse incident. Penn Live. Retrieved from https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016
/09/northumberland_county_pastor_c.html
Beausoleil, S. (2017, March 22). Former youth pastor, volunteer firefighter accused of sexual
assault of teen. Click 2 Houston. Retrieved from https://www.click2houston.com/news
/former-youth-pastor-volunteer-firefighter-accused-of-sexual-assault-of-teen
Behlen, A. (2017, July 25). LG pastor arrested on child sexual abuse charges. The Fayette
Country Record. Retrieved from https://www.fayettecountyrecord.com/articles/2017
/07/25/lg-pastor-arrested-child-sexual-abuse-charges
Belser, B. (2016, September 16). Smyrna pastor arrested for child molestation. WDAM-TV 7
News. Retrieved from http://www.wdam.com/story/33111955/pastor-arrested-for-child-
molestation
Beres, N. (2017, January 5). Former Gallatin church pastor charged with a crime. News Channel
5. Retrieved from https://www.newschannel5.com/news/local-news/former-gallatin-
church-pastor-charged-with-a-crime
232
Berge, S. (2017, November 20). Youth minister had resigned one day prior to arrest. Stephenville
Empire-Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.yourstephenvilletx.com/news/20171120
/youth-minister-had-resigned-one-day-prior-to-arrest
Blair, L. (2017, February 9). UMC pastor arrested for aggravated sexual assault of 5-y-o girl. The
Christian Post. Retrieved from https://www.christianpost.com/news/umc-pastor-arrested-
for-aggravated-sexual-assault-of-5-y-o-girl-174618/
Blair, L. (2016, August 12). Rick Trotter, fired Memphis Grizzlies announcer, arrested for
‘making upskirt videos of church members.’ The Christian Post. Retrieved from
http://www.christianpost.com/news/rick-trotter-fired-memphis-grizzlies-announcer-
arrested-making-upskirt-videos-church-members-167896/
Blest, L. (2017, February 28). Pastor, teacher sentenced in toddler abuse case at Clay Township
church day care. Lancaster Online. Retrieved from https://lancasteronline.com/news/local
/pastor-teacher-sentenced-in-toddler-abuse-case-at-clay-township/article_7955b130-fdbe-
11e6-8ddc-bb3de05bd204.html
Bodley, M. (2017, June 2). Pastor arrested for alleged sex assaults on minors in Menlo Park.
SFGate. Retrieved from https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Pastor-arrested-for-
alleged-sex-assaults-on-11190401.php
Bolton, A. (2016, September 29). Youth minister to be sentenced for inappropriately touching
girl who wanted his help. 9 News. Retrieved from
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/youth-minister-to-be-sentenced-for-
inappropriately-touching-girl-who-wanted-his-help/73-327789496
Breaking news: Former pastor arrested in Wisconsin. (2017, June 20). KCII. Retrieved from
http://kciiradio.com/2017/06/breaking-news-former-pastor-arrested-in-wisconsin/
Buckeye pastor arrested for filming girl changing. (2016, August 8). KPNX. Retrieved from
https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/valley/buckeye-pastor-arrested-for-filming-
girl-changing/290954184
Buttarazzi, D. (2017, September 2). Maine pastor, former House candidate found guilty of
assaulting girl. Bangor Daily News. Retrieved from https://bangordailynews.com/2017
/09/02/news/york/maine-pastor-former-house-candidate-found-guilty-of-assaulting-girl/
Bynum, R. (2016, May 5). Georgia pastor charged with stealing $250,000 from church.
Associated Press. Retrieved from https://apnews.com
/05a38b0d160a4c49837d01c2f7fad28f/georgia-pastor-charged-stealing-250000-church
Caloway, N. (2017, May 10). Former Maury County pastor charged in 2012 sexual battery case.
WKRN. Retrieved from http://www.wkrn.com/news/local-news/former-maury-county-
pastor-charged-in-2012-sexual-battery-case/1057502638
233
Campbell, M. (2017, December 19). Former Belton pastor charged with statutory rape of girl, 14,
he met at church. The Kansas City Star. Retrieved from
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article190603089.html
Canaan youth minister charged with sexually abusing young girl. (2016, March 19). Press
Herald. Retrieved from https://www.pressherald.com/2016/03/18/pastor-at-canaan-
church-charged-with-sexually-abusing-young-girl/
Cardona, C.; Farmer, L. (2017, March). Hurst pastor told police he kept child porn to research
lessons on Cupid, love. Dallas News. Retrieved from: https://www.dallasnews.com/news
/crime/2017/03/24/child-porn-found-baptist-pastors-computer-lands-hurst-jail
Cardone, J.; Short, J. (2017, August 24). Update: Local pastor arrested in connection with
prostitution. WNDU. Retrieved from http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Local-pastor-
arrested-in-connection-with-prostitution-441554863.html
Carey, J. (2016, August 19). 2 Virginia youth leaders arrested for inappropriately touching
minors: police. NBC Washington. Retrieved from
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Virginia-Youth-Pastors-Arrested-
Inappropriate-Relationships-With-Minors-390744511.html
Carrillo, E. (2016, September 2). Ex-pastor sentenced on child porn charges. Albuquerque
Journal. Retrieved from https://www.abqjournal.com/838471/former-los-alamos-pastor-
gets-1-year-jail-sentence-for-child-porn.html
Cedrone, T. (2016, January 29). Greenville County pastor arrested on sexual assault of a minor
charges. WSPA 7 News. Retrieved from http://www.wspa.com/news/greenville-county-
pastor-arrested-on-sexual-assault-of-a-minor-charges_20180308005111648/1018467770
Cephas, A. (2017, July 4). Former church officials plead guilty for embezzlement. The Calvert
Recorder. Retrieved from http://www.somdnews.com/recorder/spotlight/former-church-
officials-plead-guilty-for-embezzlement/article_f4d58e19-1d07-5032-abee-
73869728e81b.html
Charges against former pastor dropped. (2017, October 30). News4Jax. Retrieved from
https://www.news4jax.com/news/florida/clay-county/former-pastor-charged-with-
domestic-battery
Charges filed against former youth pastor accused of indecent assault of teen. (2016, December
12). WPXI. Retrieved from https://www.wpxi.com/news/charges-filed-against-former-
youth-pastor-accused-of-indecent-assault-of-teen/475406520
Chester Co. pastor, teaching assistant charged with raping woman after tying her up. (2017,
February 21). WBBJ. Retrieved from https://www.wbbjtv.com/2017/02/21/chester-co-
pastor-teacher-charged-raping-woman-tying/
234
Coker, M. (2016, January 8). Brandon McDade pleads not guilty to molesting 5 boys as youth
pastor. OC Weekly. https://www.ocweekly.com/brandon-mcdade-pleads-not-guilty-to-
molesting-5-boys-as-youth-pastor-6884284/
Coleman, N. (2017, November 3). Local pastor arrested on suspicion of domestic assault.
Missourian. Retrieved from https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/local/local-
pastor-arrested-on-suspicion-of-domestic-assault/article_d7742868-c0dd-11e7-b76a-
af371bcd1b7d.html
Coller, P. (2017, October 13). E. Palestine pastor charged with sexual misconduct involving teen.
WKBN. Retrieved from https://www.wkbn.com/local-news/e-palestine-pastor-charged-
with-sexual-misconduct-involving-teen/1097726556
Comstock, L. (2017, December 19). Church youth group leader denied PTI. New Jersey Herald.
Retrieved from http://www.njherald.com/20171219/church-youth-group-leader-denied-
pti
Cortez, R. (2016, September 29). Kidney failure blamed for arrested pastor’s uncharacteristic
behavior. KSNT. Retrieved from https://www.ksnt.com/news/local-news/local-pastor-
arrested-for-aggravated-assault/901480144
Counts, J. (2017, July 31). ‘I trusted him,’ says teen on youth pastor accused of molesting her on
mission trip. Mlive.com. Retrieved from http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-
arbor/index.ssf/2017/07/teen_testifies_how_youth_pasto.html
Craig, D. (2016, January 12). Chesco church: We’re ‘devastated’ by rape accusations against
former pastor. Philly Voice. Retrieved from http://www.phillyvoice.com/police-seek-
chester-county-pastor-rape-teenage-girl/
Crawford, L. (2016, June 16). Former Three Rivers pastor charged with criminal sexual conduct.
WWMT.com West Michigan. Retrieved from http://wwmt.com/news/local/former-three-
rivers-pastor-charged-with-criminal-sexual-conduct
Cutway, A. (2016, December 6). Volusia youth counselor accused of molesting boy he was
mentoring. WKMG ClickOrlando. Retrieved from https://www.clickorlando.com/news
/youth-counselor-accused-of-molesting-boy-he-was-mentoring
Davis, K. (2017, March 22). Pastor, law enforcement chaplain arrested with CDV. WOLO.
Retrieved from https://www.abccolumbia.com/2017/03/22/pastor-law-enforcement-
chaplain-arrested-for-cdv/
Delage, J. (2016, October 28). Wisconsin pastor accused of stealing parishioners’ meds. Twin
Cities Pioneer Press. Retrieved from https://www.twincities.com/2016/10/28/wisconsin-
pastor-accused-of-stealing-parishioners-meds/
235
Diaz, E. (2016, July 5). Horrifying details: youth pastor arrested for impregnating 10-year-old
girl. BET.com. Retrieved from: https://www.bet.com/news/national/2016/07/05/youth-
pastor-arrested.html
Director of children’s ministry at Largo church arrested for inappropriately touching teen. (2017,
June 14). WFTS. Retrieved from https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-north-
pinellas/largo/director-of-childrens-ministry-at-largo-church-arrested-for-inappropriately-
touching-teen
Donahue, C. (2016, June 14). Bridgeport pastor charged with illegally selling church to himself.
Bridgeport Daily Voice. Retrieved from https://bridgeport.dailyvoice.com/police-
fire/bridgeport-pastor-charged-with-illegally-selling-church-to-himself/713889/
Dowling, B. (2017, June 3). Congregation praying for embattled pastor in sex sting. Boston
Herald. Retrieved from http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2017/06
/congregation_praying_for_embattled_pastor_in_sex_sting
Drakeford, C. (2016, September 16). Who is Jose Vincente Morales? Arizona pastor
impregnated 13-year-old girl, faces child molestation claims, police say. International
Business Times. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.com/who-jose-vincente-morales-
arizona-pastor-impregnated-13-year-old-girl-faces-child-2417287
Dunn, R. (2016, April 14). Former music director, pastor sentenced. The Blade. Retrieved from
http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2016/04/14/Former-music-director-pastor-
sentenced.html
East Austin pastor arrested for alleged sexual assault of child. (2017, June 12). KVUE. Retrieved
from https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/east-austin-pastor-arrested-for-alleged-
sexual-assault-of-child/448154775
Ellis, M. (2017, December 20). Former Easley pastor arrested on child sexual exploitation
charges. Independent Mail. Retrieved from https://www.independentmail.com/story/news
/2017/12/20/former-easley-pastor-arrested-child-sex-charges/968137001/
Enea, J. (2016, April 11). Youth pastor Robert Jerez arrested for having sex with underage
churchgoer. ABC 15. Retrieved from https://www.abc15.com/news/crime/tolleson-pd-
youth-pastor-robert-jerez-arrested-for-having-sex-with-underage-churchgoer
Eucce, N. (2016, May 12). Deputies: local pastor arrested for sexually assaulting churchgoers.
Fox 24. Retrieved from http://www.nwahomepage.com/news/fox-24/deputies-local-
pastor-arrested-for-sexually-assaulting-churchgoers/455814497
Faherty, D. (2016, March 31). Avery Co. pastor accused of sex crime against teen, deputies say.
WSOC. Retrieved from https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/avery-county-pastor-
accused-of-sex-crime-deputies-say/187881384
236
Faith community unites for Filipinotown pastor facing deportation. (2017, July 28). CBS LA.
Retrieved from https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2017/07/28/faith-community-unites-for-
filipinotown-pastor-facing-deportation/
Farmer, L. (2016, April 7). Youth pastor accused of sexually assaulting 3 boys. The Dallas
Morning News. Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-dallas-morning-
news/20160407/282037621315758
Favre, C. (2016, March 17). Youth pastor at local church facing local sexual assault charges.
Picayune Item. Retrieved from http://www.picayuneitem.com/2016/03/sexual-assault-
update/
Feehan, J. (2017, November 14). 3rd Toledo pastor charged with sex trafficking minors. Toledo
Blade. Retrieved from http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2017/11/14/3rd-Toledo-
pastor-charged-with-sex-trafficking-minors.html
Ferrell, J. (2017, March 3). DeSoto Parish youth pastor, high school student arrested on child
porn charges. KSLA 12. Retrieved from http://www.ksla.com/story/34658625/desoto-
parish-youth-pastor-high-school-student-arrested-on-child-porn-charges
Ferrise, A. (2016, November 15). Pastor accused of raping preteen runaway at Cleveland motel.
Cleveland.com. Retrieved from https://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/11
/pastor_accused_of_raping_prete.html
Florida youth pastor charged with sexual battery on girl. (2016, June 12). Associated Press.
Retrieved from http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ap-florida-
youth-pastor-sexual-battery-20160621-story.html
Floyd County pastor arrested on child porn charges. (2017, March 10). WYMT. Retrieved from
http://www.wymt.com/content/news/Floyd-County-pastor-arrested-on-child-porn-
charges-415915423.html
Former Ardmore pastor guilty of stealing money headed to prison. (2016, December 7). KTEN.
Retrieved from http://www.kten.com/story/34001316/former-ardmore-pastor-guilty-of-
stealing-money-headed-to-prison
Former Brevard County youth pastor accused of having sex with teen. (2016, December 16).
WFTV. Retrieved from https://www.wftv.com/news/local/former-brevard-county-youth-
pastor-accused-of-having-sex-with-teen/476621212
Former east Charlotte assistant pastor pleads guilty to molesting young girls. (2017, May 31).
WSOCTV. Retrieved from https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/former-east-charlotte-
assistant-pastor-pleads-guilty-to-molesting-young-girls/528283187
237
Former Grants Pass pastor accused of raping teen girl at church. (2017, February 23). KATU.
Retrieved from https://katu.com/news/local/former-pastor-accused-of-sexually-abusing-
teen-girl-at-church
Former pastor arrested for sexual abuse of four children. (2017, September 8). The-Dispatch.
Retrieved from http://www.the-dispatch.com/news/20170908/former-pastor-arrested-for-
sexual-abuse-of-four-children
Former pastor, blackmail victim arrested for soliciting sex in Jefferson County. (no date). X95
Radio. Retrieved from http://www.x95radio.com/2017/09/28/former-pastor-blackmail-
victim-arrested-for-soliciting-sex-in-jefferson-county/
Former Schoals pastor, secretary accused of using church funds for home repairs, vacations.
(2016, February 5). WHNT. Retrieved from https://whnt.com/2016/02/05/former-shoals-
pastor-secretary-accused-of-using-church-funds-for-home-repairs-vacations/
Former youth pastor arrested for attempted sodomy, child molestation; pastors respond. (2017,
June 29). WTVM. Retrieved from http://www.wtvm.com/story/35779954/pastors-
respond-after-former-youth-pastor-arrested-for-sodomy-child-molestation
Former youth pastor arrested on child seduction charges. (2016, October 4). WBIW. Retrieved
from http://www.wbiw.com/local/archive/2016/10/former-youth-pastor-arrested-on-
child-seduction-charges.php
Former youth pastor charged with assault. (2017, November 27). The Fairfield Ledger. Retrieved
from https://fairfield-ia.villagesoup.com/p/former-youth-pastor-charged-with-
assault/1707240
Former youth pastor facing child porn charges. (2016, March 28). WGRZ. Retrieved from
https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/crime/former-youth-pastor-facing-child-porn-
charges/106059605
Former youth pastor facing child sex crimes charged after admitting to similar charges. (2017,
May 17). 9 & 10 News. Retrieved from http://www.9and10news.com/2017/05/17/former-
youth-pastor-facing-child-sex-crimes-charges-after-admitting-to-similar-charges/
Fort Bend County pastor charged with sexually assaulting 14 year old. (2016, December 2).
KHOU. Retrieved from https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/fort-bend-county-
pastor-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-14-year-old/362240998
Fortier, M.; Underwood, K. (2016, August 23). Former New Hampshire pastor arrested for
sexually assaulting a minor. NECN. Retrieved from https://www.necn.com/news/new-
england/Former-New-Hampshire-Pastor-Arrested-for-Sexually-Assaulting-a-Minor-
391054781.html
238
Franklin, D. (2016, April 2). Retired assistant pastor arrested for allegedly molesting 10-year-old
girl. KFOR 4. Retrieved from http://kfor.com/2016/04/06/retired-assistant-pastor-
arrested-for-allegedly-molesting-10-year-old-girl/
Freeman Jr., V. (2016, October 19). Former Henrico youth pastor charged with sex crimes
against a child. CBS 6. Retrieved from http://wtvr.com/2016/10/19/former-henrico-youth-
pastor-arrested-on-sex-crimes-against-a-child/
Freeman, M. (2016, December 5). Former Ashland pastor faces sex-abuse charges. Mail Tribune.
Retrieved from http://mailtribune.com/news/happening-now/former-ashland-pastor-
faces-sex-abuse-charges
French, C. (2017, August 3). Youth pastor accused of molesting child in ministry. WFTS Tampa
Bay. Retrieved from https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-hillsborough/youth-
pastor-accused-of-molesting-child-in-ministry
Garrison, G. (2017, June 16). Ex-Alabama pastor jailed in Georgia for kidnapping, assault,
feticide. AL.com. Retrieved from https://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2017/06/ex-
alabama_pastor_jailed_in_ge.html
Gecan, A. (2017, October 4). Methodist pastor in Neptune, Neptune City faces sex charge. App.
Retrieved from https://www.app.com/story/news/crime/jersey-
mayhem/2017/10/04/neptune-social-worker-arrested-sexual-contact-client-also-
methodist-pastor/732098001/
Gegan, A. (2017, March 21). Jackson pastor convicted in Bitcoin scheme. App. Retrieved from
https://www.app.com/story/news/crime/jersey-mayhem/2017/03/21/jackson-pastor-
convicted-bitcoin-money-laundering-scheme/99448268/
Gibson Co. pastor charged with domestic violence. (2016, January 4). The Jackson Sun.
Retrieved from http://www.jacksonsun.com/story/news/crime/2016/01/04/gibson-co-
pastor-charged-domestic-violence/78269948/
Gore, L. (2016, September 19). Former Alabama youth pastor was ‘cool’ with meeting 14-year-
old boy for sex, police say. AL.com. Retrieved from
https://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/09/former_alabama_youth_pastor_wa.html
Green, K. (2017, December 11). Former Norfolk youth pastor accused of sexually assaulting
teenager. WAVY 10. Retrieved from http://www.wavy.com/news/norfolk-man-accused-
of-sexually-assaulting-teenager/1078311284
Grunik, K. (2017, July 13). Sheriff: Florida pastor found with thousands of sexual videos,
pictures of young girls. Fox 17 Nashville. Retrieved from http://fox17.com/news/nation-
world/florida-pastor-arrested-with-hundreds-of-sexual-videos-of-young-women
239
Gunderman, D. (2017, January 5). North Carolina pastor arrested, charged with 9 counts of
robbery in string of heists suspected to be drug-motivated. New York Daily News.
Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/n-pastor-arrested-charged-9-
counts-robbery-article-1.2935831
Gutierrez, A. (2017, January 9). KCMO pastor charged with punching, kicking a church
member. KSHB. Retrieved from https://www.kshb.com/news/crime/kcmo-pastor-
charged-with-punching-kicking-a-church-member
Hamilton pastor arrested in Kentucky sex sting operation. (2017, October 31). WCBI. Retrieved
from https://www.wcbi.com/hamilton-pastor-arrested-kentucky-sex-sting-operation/
Hanson, H. (2016, August 26). Anti-LGBT pastor arrested on child molestation charges.
Huffington Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pastor-orlando-
tweet-child-molestation_us_57c08cbfe4b04193420f0a10
Harper, R. (2016, September 8). Mobile pastor arrested on child rape, sodomy charges.
Worldnow. Retrieved from http://meredithaz.worldnow.com/story/33054970/mobile-
pastor-arrested-on-child-rape-sodomy-charges
Hart, G. (2017, November 7). Las Vegas pastor suspected in armed robberies at M Resort.
KSNV. Retrieved from http://news3lv.com/news/local/las-vegas-pastor-suspected-in-
armed-robberies-at-m-resort
Harvey, N. (2017, September 1). Judge certifies sexual assault charges against Roanoke pastor.
The Roanoke Times. Retrieved from http://www.roanoke.com/news/crime/roanoke/judge-
certifies-sexual-assault-charges-against-roanoke-pastor/article_d82e2109-03d9-5eab-
b3c6-1f28df588c41.html
Hawkins, C. (2017, October 25). Update: former Ballinger youth pastor arrested. Runnels County
Register. Retrieved from http://www.runnelscountyregister.com/news/20171025/update-
former-ballinger-youth-pastor-arrested
Hazlehurst minister arrested on child sex charges. (2016, December 30). WTOC. Retrieved from
http://www.wtoc.com/story/34155152/hazlehurst-minister-arrested-on-child-sex-charges
Hendren, M. (2016, May 18). Henrietta pastor, former teacher indicted on sex abuse charges.
News Talk 1290. Retrieved from http://newstalk1290.com/henrietta-pastor-former-
teacher-indicted-on-sex-abuse-charges/
Hernandez, T. (2016, September 13). Former Methodist pastor charged in child pornography
case. The Oregonian. Retrieved from http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf
/2016/09/former_portland_methodist_reve.html
Hicks, M. (2017, July 27). Local pastor facing domestic battery allegations. Log Cabin
Democrat. Retrieved from http://www.thecabin.net/crime/local/news/2017-07-27/local-
pastor-facing-domestic-battery-allegations
240
Hocutt, A. (2017, January 26). Pastor of Wilmington church charged with assault. WWAY.
Retrieved from https://www.wwaytv3.com/2017/01/26/pastor-of-wilmington-church-
charged-with-assault/
Hogan, R. (2016, September 23). Local pastor arrested on rape allegation. Helena World.
Retrieved from http://www.helena-arkansas.com/news/20160923/local-pastor-arrested-
on-rape-allegation
Holley, J. (2016, April 15). Former Moore youth minister charged with child sex crimes. News 9.
Retrieved from http://www.news9.com/story/31739801/moore-youth-minter-charged-
with-crimes-involving-children
Holt, M. (2017, February 23). Brevard County pastor accused of molesting teenage girl freed
from jail. WFTV 9. Retrieved from https://www.wftv.com/news/local/brevard-county-
pastor-arrested-for-molesting-teen-investigators-say/496460304
Hopf, M. (2017, November 28). Charges against Quincy pastor and former Marine colonel
involve three children. Herald-Whig. Retrieved from http://www.whig.com/20171128
/virginia-charges-against-quincy-pastor-former-marine-colonel-involve-three-children#//
Humbles, A. (2016, March 14). Ex-Wilson youth pastor pleads guilty to statutory rape. The
Tennessean. Retrieved from
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/wilson/2016/03/14/ex-wilson-youth-
pastor-pleads-guilty-statutory-rape/81541590/
Hutton, C. (2016, July 19). Ex-youth pastor at Bellingham church accused of raping girl. The
Bellingham Herald. Retrieved from
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/crime/article90671007.html
Hyman, D. (2016, July 12). New Haven pastor arrested on sex assault charges. WTNH 8.
Retrieved from http://www.wtnh.com/news/crime/new-haven-pastor-arrested-on-sex-
assault-charges_20180416082250660/1124021753
Indiana pastor charged with threatening to shoot neighborhood children. (2016, October 13).
CBS News. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/indiana-pastor-charged-with-
threatening-to-shoot-neighborhood-children/
Ivice, P. (2016, May 12). Former youth pastor at Stuart’s Grace Place gets 45 years in child porn
case. TCPalm. Retrieved from http://archive.tcpalm.com/news/crime/martin-
county/former-youth-pastor-at-stuarts-grace-place-gets-45-years-in-child-porn-case-
2e03adc2-cd4f-4a4a-e053--379242011.html
Jacksboro pastor, 68, accused of raping teen who lived with him. (2017, February 27). WBIR.
Retrieved from https://www.wbir.com/article/news/crime/jacksboro-pastor-68-accused-
of-raping-teen-who-lived-with-him/415562650
241
Jacobs, D. (2016, May 31). Two Knoxville-area pastors plead not guilty to human trafficking
charges. Knoxville News Sentinel. Retrieved from
http://archive.knoxnews.com/news/crime-courts/ministers-accused-in-prostitution-sting-
go-before-judge-today-3421d202-4897-2dfd-e053-0100007ffeb6-381366761.html
Jany, L. (2017, January 10). Two more arrested in N. Mpls religious beatings of young boy and
girl. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/two-more-arrested-in-n-
mpls-religious-beatings-of-young-boy-and-girl/410323895/
Jeffersonville pastor arrested after allegedly seeking sex with a minor. (2016, June 16). WDRB.
Retrieved from http://www.wdrb.com/story/32232744/jeffersonville-pastor-arrested-
after-allegedly-seeking-sex-with-a-minor
Jensen, J. (2017, May 17). Former Pastor arrested for sexual abuse. Illinois Homepage. Retrieved
from https://www.illinoishomepage.net/news/local-news/former-pastor-arrested-for-
sexual-abuse/674354473
Jones, S. (2017, August 5). Henrico school board member Pastor Roscoe Cooper III arrested on
I-64. WTVR. Retrieved from https://wtvr.com/2017/08/05/roscoe-cooper-iii-dui-arrest-
henrico-school-board-pastor-rising-mt-zion-baptist-church/
Joyce, K. (2017, November 25). Colorado pastor arrested for allegedly impregnating 14-year-old
girl. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/25/colorado-pastor-
arrested-for-allegedly-impregnating-14-year-old-girl.html
Kaiser, P., & Tyree, E. (2017, March 1). UPDATE: Bedford County pastor claims assault, bad
check charges are “100% false.” Retrieved from https://wset.com/news/local/bedford-
county-pastor-arrested-on-assault-bad-check-charges
Kasarda, B. (2016, May 13). Former youth pastor charged with church sex abuse. NWI Times.
Retrieved from https://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/porter/former-youth-pastor-
charged-with-church-sex-abuse/article_e6738383-c580-5c9f-bba8-0d3767b07e19.html
Kendrick, T. (2017, January 18). Local pastor and probation officer arrested for solicitation of
prostitution. KARK. Retrieved from https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/local-pastor-
and-probation-officer-arrested-for-solicitation-of-prostitution/642330695
Kim, G. (2016, March 31). Local youth pastor charged with multiple counts of sexual abuse of
minors. Lompoc Record. Retrieved from https://lompocrecord.com/local-youth-pastor-
charged-with-multiple-counts-of-sexual-abuse/article_2026cc9e-60ad-501e-96b8-
1f3492bffebf.html
Kim, S. (2017, January 9). Former Wilton youth ministry worker accused of child sex crimes.
The Hour. Retrieved from https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Former-Wilton-church-
worker-arrested-for-child-10840832.php
242
Knodel, J. (2017, August 16). Pastor accused of sexually abusing girls he met at Fort Worth
church. Dallas News. Retrieved from https://www.dallasnews.com/news/hurst/2017/08
/16/pastor-accused-sexually-abusing-girls-met-fort-worth-church
Kocher, G.; Stunson, M. (2017, October 12). Former pastor of large Lexington church charged
with sexual abuse of teens. Lexington Herald Leader. Retrieved from
https://www.kentucky.com/news/local/crime/article178473861.html
Kragie, A. Court filings details alleged abuse by Montgomery Country preacher. Houston
Chronicle. Retrieved from https://www.houstonchronicle.com/neighborhood
/magnolia/news/article/Church-of-preacher-charged-with-child-sexual-10598400.php
Lane, W. (2017, October 9). Deputies: Hernando youth pastor arrested, reportedly gave girls
alcohol, touched one inappropriately. WFTS Tampa Bay. Retrieved from
https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/deputies-hernando-youth-pastor-arrested-
reportedly-gave-girls-alcohol-touched-one-inappropriately
Langston, A. (2017, April 26). Former youth pastor arrested for sexual assault of a child.
Myhighplains.com. Retrieved from https://www.myhighplains.com/news/former-youth-
pastor-arrested-for-sexual-assault-of-a-child/700166822
Lanning, C. (2017, March). Former Sherwood pastor arrested in child porn case. KARK.
Retrieved from https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/former-sherwood-pastor-
arrested-in-child-porn-case/454181388
Local pastor arrested for knowingly transmitting STDs. (2017, June 27). WTKR. Retrieved from
https://wtkr.com/2017/06/27/hampton-man-charged-with-sexual-battery-intent-to-
transmit-infection/
Longman, M. (2017, February 16). Former Dallas Center pastor pleads not guilty to sex abuse
charges. Des Moines Register. Retrieved from
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/crime-and-courts/2017/02/16/former-
dallas-center-pastor-pleads-not-guilty-sex-abuse-charges/98021482/
Lotan, G. (2016, November 10). Arrested youth pastor was accused of inappropriate conduct in
2009. Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved from http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-
news/os-samuel-pierre-youth-pastor-follow-20161110-story.html
Loyer, S. (2017, December 1). New Brunswick pastor charged with criminal sexual contact with
17-year-old. My Central Jersey. Retrieved from
https://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/news/crime/2017/12/01/new-brunswick-pastor-
charged-criminal-sexual-contact-17-year-old/914452001/
Luciano, P. (2016, July 20). Luciano: Facing money woes, pastor turns to burglary, police say.
Journal Star. Retrieved from http://www.pjstar.com/news/20160720/luciano-facing-
money-woes-pastor-turns-to-burglary-police-say
243
Lyons, B. (2016, October 28). Albany pastor Edward Smart, wife charged with three felonies.
Times Union. Retrieved from https://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Albany-pastor-
Edward-Smart-wife-charged-with-10418197.php
Mabilog, P. (2016, January 7). NYC pastor charged for stealing church money says he was
underpaid. Christian Today. Retrieved from https://www.christiantoday.com/article/nyc-
pastor-charged-for-stealing-church-money-says-he-was-underpaid/75824.htm
Markus, B. (2016, May 12). NC pastor busted for assaulting woman seeking counseling: ‘He
started sticking his tongue into my ear.’ Raw Story. Retrieved from
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/nc-pastor-busted-for-assaulting-woman-seeking-
counseling-he-started-sticking-his-tongue-into-my-ear/
Marroni, S. (2016, March 10). Former Cumberland County pastor pleads to indecent assault
young girls at church. Penn Live. Retrieved from
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/03/raymond_buhrow_pastor_charges.html
Marsh, S. (2017, December 20). Pineville youth pastor charged with child molestation. KOAM 7.
Retrieved from http://www.koamtv.com/story/37112026/pineville-youth-pastor-charged-
with-child-molestation
Martinez, J. (2017, October 10). Las Cruces youth pastor accused of child sexual exploitation.
The Associated Press. Retrieved from https://kfoxtv.com/news/local/las-cruces-youth-
pastor-accused-of-child-sexual-exploitation
Matsumoto, S. (2016, July 7). Pastor arrested in Salem for raping child he met at church. Oregon
Live. Retrieved from https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-
news/index.ssf/2016/07/pastor_arrested_in_salem_for_r.html
McAllister, T. (2017, December 1). Sex with children: Former Panorama City youth minister
arrested, police seek more victims. mynewsLA.com. Retrieved from
https://mynewsla.com/crime/2017/12/01/sex-with-children-former-panorama-city-youth-
minister-arrested-police-seek-more-victims/
McCall, M. (2016, February 22). Family recounts interactions with South Side pastor charged
with assault. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-
baptist-pastor-sexual-abuse-charge-met-20160221-story.html
McCracken, K. (2017, December 5). Former Sand Springs pastor accused of scamming church
members out of tens of thousands. Tulsa World. Retrieved from
https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/former-sand-springs-pastor-accused-of-
scamming-church-members-out/article_a9185d1d-9d7a-5150-bcca-883896c8a7a4.html
McCrone, B. (2017, December 7). New Jersey church pastor charged with sex assault. NBC 10.
Retrieved from https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/New-Jersey-Church-Pastor-
Harry-Thomas-Charged-With-Sex-Assault-462551203.html
244
McCutcheon, M. (2017, March 25). Columbus pastor arrested for insurance fraud. WTHR.
Retrieved from https://www.wthr.com/article/columbus-pastor-arrested-for-insurance-
fraud
McDonald, Z. (2017, September 28). Pastor sought for abuse, imprisonment arrested in P.C.
Panama City News Herald. Retrieved from http://www.newsherald.com/news/20170928
/pastor-sought-for-abuse-imprisonment-arrested-in-pc
McFarland, S. (2017, February 27). Hillsboro pastor accused of aggravated sexual assault of
child. Star-Telegram. Retrieved from https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas
/article135359414.html
McLaughlin, K. (2017, July 26). Former youth pastor arrested over the murder and
dismemberment of a teenage boy 23 years ago is accused of abusing other victims. Mail
Online. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4732628/Former-youth-
pastor-murdered-teen-abused-others.html
Mencarini, M. (2016, March 28). Judge: Sex assault by ex-minister ‘a betrayal of trust.’ Detroit
Free Press. Retrieved from https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2016/03
/28/sex-assault-teen-ex-minister-sentencing/82342908/
Miles, J. (2017, March 30). Dallas pastor arrested for theft of up to $500k. CBS DFW. Retrieved
from https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2017/03/30/dallas-pastor-arrested-for-theft-of-up-to-500k/
Miller, B. (2016, September 19). Thornton pastor arrested on child sexual assault charges. The
Denver Channel. Retrieved from https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-
news/thornton-pastor-arrested-on-child-sexual-assault-charges
Miller, B. (2017, February 2). Death of 2-year-old was ‘God’s will’ say parents who don’t
believe in medical treatment. Penn Live. Retrieved from
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/02/death_of_2-year-old_was_gods_w.html
Mitchell, B. (2016, July 14). Isle of Wight Co. pastor arrested on 11 more child pornography
charges. WTKR 3. Retrieved from https://wtkr.com/2016/07/14/isle-of-wight-co-pastor-
arrested-on-11-more-child-pornography-charges/
Mitchell, B. (2017, June 15). Former Virginia Beach youth pastor found guilty in 15-year-old
sexual assault. WTKR. Retrieved from https://wtkr.com/2017/06/15/former-virginia-
beach-youth-pastor-found-guilty-in-15-year-old-sexual-assault/
Monfort, A.; Woo, M. (2016, May 12). Colonial Heights pastor charged with sex crimes
involving a minor. WWBT. Retrieved from http://www.nbc12.com/story/31957580
/colonial-heights-pastor-charged-with-sex-crimes-involving-a-minor
Monroe pastor arrested for sexual assault of child worked for Union County public schools until
2015. (2016, August 26). WCCB Charlotte. Retrieved from
https://www.wccbcharlotte.com/2016/04/26/monroe-pastor-arrested-for-sexual-assault-
of-child/
245
Moore, W. (2016, October 21). New Albany preacher facing felony sex charges. Daily Journal.
Retrieved from http://www.djournal.com/news/crime-law-enforcement/new-albany-
preacher-facing-felony-sex-charges/article_7add52c9-315f-56f0-b600-
58b439103764.html
Moreno, M. (2017, July 20). The Woodlands pastor charged with prostitution. KTRK. Retrieved
from http://abc13.com/news/the-woodlands-pastor-charged-with-prostitution/2236942/
Moreno, N. (2016, February 26). Former pastor at Pomona church pleads no contest to molesting
a child. The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Retrieved from https://www.dailybulletin.com
/2016/02/26/former-pastor-at-pomona-church-pleads-no-contest-to-molesting-a-child/
Moreno, N.; Sobol, R. (2016, September 7). Pastor charged in slaying of retired minister: ‘They
always had little arguments going on.’ Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-police-question-pastor-in-
shooting-death-of-retired-minister-20160906-story.html
Morgan, S. (2017, July 12). Clinton youth pastor arrested for indecent behavior with a juvenile.
WAFB 9. Retrieved from http://www.wafb.com/story/35871600/clinton-youth-pastor-
arrested-for-indecent-behavior-with-a-juvenile
Morgante, M. (2016, October 31). Congregants gather strength after arrest of pastor. Merced
Sun-Star. Retrieved from https://www.mercedsunstar.com/news/article111526617.html
Morice, J. (2016, April 6). North Olmsted youth pastor indicted on sexual battery charges.
Cleveland.com. Retrieved from https://www.cleveland.com/north-
olmsted/index.ssf/2016/04/north_olmsted_youth_pastor_acc.html
Mullen, M. (2017, October 26). Charges: Pastor Keith Haskell faked being a cop, pepper-sprayed
teen shoplifter. City Pages. Retrieved from http://www.citypages.com/news/charges-
pastor-keith-haskell-faked-being-a-cop-pepper-sprayed-teen-shoplifter/453358933
Musallam, A. (2016, December 28). Stockton pastor accused of sexually assaulting girl. CBS
Sacramento. Retrieved from http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/12/28/stockton-pastor-
accused-of-sexually-assaulting-girl/
N. Liberty man arrested for inappropriate contact with multiple children. (2017, April 27).
KCRG. Retrieved from http://www.kcrg.com/content/news/Man-arrested-for-
inappropriate-contact-with-multiple-children---420613863.html
Naham, M. (2017, November 25). Youth pastor arrested after killing family on Thanksgiving,
police say. AJC. Retrieved from https://www.ajc.com/news/national/youth-pastor-
arrested-after-killing-family-thanksgiving-police-
say/GNQ0JNcd3Arrg5kEY5JHHP/?icmp=np_inform_variation-control
Napoli, D. (2017, October 26). Local pastor among 140 johns busted in prostitution sting. Chron.
Retrieved from https://www.chron.com/houston/article/Pastor-caught-in-prostitution-
bust-12309715.php
246
Nelson, P. (2016, May 24). Delmar Episcopal priest pleads guilty to video ‘peeping.’ Times
Union. Retrieved from https://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Episcopal-priest-pleads-
guilty-avoids-jail-for-7941086.php
New details: Former Tallahassee youth pastor facing additional charges. (2017, August 4).
WTXL. Retrieved from http://www.wtxl.com/news/new-details-former-tallahassee-youth-
pastor-facing-additional-charges/article_4a6b51c4-76d9-11e7-8a98-e34f9d50506a.html
NC church leader accused of sending nude pics to 11-year-old boy. (2016, December 8). WVAY.
Retrieved from https://myfox8.com/2016/12/08/nc-church-leader-accused-of-sending-
nude-pics-to-11-year-old-boy/
NJ pastor accused of molesting teens who attended his church: Prosecutors. (2016, February 12).
NBC New York. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/New-Jersey-
Church-Pastor-Arrested-Sex-Abuse-Teenage-Girls-368698231.html
Noll, J. (2016, December 28). Youth pastor admits to ‘inappropriate physical interactions’ with
14-year-old girl. 11 Alive. Retrieved from
https://www.11alive.com/article/news/crime/youth-pastor-admits-to-inappropriate-
physical-interactions-with-14-year-old-girl/85-379637889
North Aurora pastor, a convicted sex offender, arrested on sex abuse charges. (2016, April 24).
WGNTV. Retrieved from https://wgntv.com/2016/04/24/north-aurora-pastor-a-convicted-
sex-offender-arrested-on-sex-abuse-charges/
Olsen, T. (2017, July 18). Former Duluth youth pastor charged with abuse. Duluth News
Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/crime-and-
courts/4299025-former-duluth-youth-pastor-charged-abuse
O’Neil, T. (2016, January 8). Bethalto church elder charged in secret video recordings, pastor
charged with destroying evidence. St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved from
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/bethalto-church-elder-charged-in-
secret-video-recordings-pastor-charged/article_8cd48d4e-d13d-53b0-a0e2-
eeb76bc72326.html
Orr, S. (2017, September 15). “Fight Church” pastor Paul Burress facing more forcible touching
charges. Democrat and Chronicle. Retrieved from
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2017/09/15/paul-burress-fight-
church-pastor-facing-more-sex-charges/669922001/
Paluska, M. (2017, April 27). Pastor arrested for sexual battery on teenager; 17-year-old girl
claims she was victimized for years. WFTS Tampa Bay. Retrieved from
https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/local-news/pastor-arrested-for-sexual-battery
247
Parascandola, R., & Sit, R. (2016, June 07). Pastor nabbed in sex abuse of 6-year-old girl his
wife was babysitting in Queens. New York Daily News. Retrieved from
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/pastor-nabbed-sex-abuse-6-year-old-
girl-queens-article-1.2663787
Pastor accused of child sex crimes worked at Union Co. schools. (2016, April 26). WBTV.
Retrieved from http://www.wbtv.com/story/31818225/update-pastor-accused-of-child-
sex-crimes-worked-at-union-co-schools
Pastor and wife accused of social security fraud. (2017, July 20). LEX 18. Retrieved from
http://www.lex18.com/story/35936830/pastor-and-wife-accused-of-social-security-fraud
Pastor arrested on battery charge. (2017, February 21). The Republic. Retrieved from
http://www.therepublic.com/2017/02/22/pastor-arrested-on-battery-charge/
Pastor arrested on drug charges. (2017, June 6). Casey County News. Retrieved from
https://www.caseynews.net/content/pastor-arrested-drug-charges
Pastor at Boston church charged with drug trafficking. (2017, May 3). WCVB. Retrieved from
http://www.wcvb.com/article/pastor-at-boston-church-charged-with-drug-
trafficking/9598105
Pastor charged for possessing child porn. (2016, October 28). KARE 11. Retrieved from
https://www.kare11.com/article/news/crime/pastor-charged-for-possessing-child-
porn/343832402
Pastor charged with sex crime. (2016, June 16). LEX 18. Retrieved from
http://www.lex18.com/story/32238793/pastor-charged-with-sex-crime
Pastor charged with stealing church offerings. (2016, January 27). WITN. Retrieved from
http://www.witn.com/home/headlines/Pastor-charged-with-stealing-church-offerings-
366722821.html
Pastor gets 5 years probation. (2017, December 13). Fairmont Sentinel. Retrieved from
http://www.fairmontsentinel.com/news/local-news/2017/12/13/pastor-gets-5-years-
probation/
Pastor of east Columbus church charged with sexually assaulting young girls. (2017, July 31).
WSYX/WTTE. Retrieved from https://abc6onyourside.com/news/local/pastor-of-east-
columbus-church-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-young-girls
Pelisek, C. (2016, April 4). Former Florida high school football coach and youth pastor charged
with 40 counts of child sex abuse may have more victims, Sheriff says. People. Retrieved
from https://people.com/crime/former-florida-high-school-football-coach-and-youth-
pastor-charged-with-40-counts-of-child-sex-abuse-may-have-more-victims-police-chief-
says/
248
Paul, J. (2017, March 8). Lafayette church pastor accused of child molesting. Journal & Courier.
Retrieved from https://www.jconline.com/story/news/crime/2017/03/08/police-man-
molested-6-year-old-during-play-dates/98894938/
Pefley, A. (2016, September 20). Florida pastor accused of performing sex acts on teen he met
on gay dating app. CBS 12. Retrieved from https://cbs12.com/news/local/associate-
pastor-from-vero-beach-church-arrested-on-sex-charges
Perry, S. (2017, August 11). Former pastor arrested for embezzling church funds. Bluefield Daily
Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.bdtonline.com/news/former-pastor-arrested-for-
embezzling-church-funds/article_754892b2-7e40-11e7-8c4f-87afc8b0a6ef.html
Person arrested in Belvidere massage parlor busts a former pastor. (2016, September 19). WREX.
Retrieved from http://www.wrex.com/story/33129134/2016/09/Monday/person-arrested-
in-belvidere-massage-parlor-busts-a-former-pastor
Providence pastor arrested for child molestation. (2017, March 8). ABC6. Retrieved from
http://www.abc6.com/story/34697587/providence-pastor-arrested-for-child-molestation
Raghuveer, A. (2016, January 6). Exclusive: Former Delta pastor facing federal child
pornography charge. NBC 24. Retrieved from http://nbc24.com/news/local/delta-pastor-
facing-federal-child-pornography-charge
Randall. (2016, June 16). Queen City Christian Church pastor arrested on sodomy charge. KTTN.
Retrieved from https://www.kttn.com/queen-city-christian-church-pastor-arrested-on-
sodomy-charge/
Reeves, J. (2017, February 27). Smithfield church youth leader caught naked with 15-year-old
girl, officials say. CBS 17. Retrieved from http://www.cbs17.com/news/smithfield-
church-youth-leader-caught-naked-with-15-year-old-girl-officials-say/1016927444
Remer, J. (no date). Turley minister arrested as part of federal child pornography investigation.
KTUL. Retrieved from http://ktul.com/news/local/2nd-tulsa-man-arrested-as-part-of-
federal-investigation-into-child-pornography
Remkus, A. (2016, December 16). Alabama minister accused of sexually abusing child. AL.com.
Retrieved from https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2016/12
/alabama_minister_accused_of_se.html
Remkus, A. (2017, September 25). Huntsville pastor charged with failing to report sexual abuse
of child by former deputy. AL.com. Retrieved from https://www.al.com/news
/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/09/huntsville_pastor_charged_with.html
Report: Edinburgh pastor arrested. (2017, March 10). The Republic. Retrieved from
http://www.therepublic.com/2017/03/10/report-edinburgh-pastor-arrested/
249
Rieck, D. (2017, March 27). St. Louis pastor charged with statutory rape. Belleville News-
Democrat. Retrieved from https://www.bnd.com/news/local/article141100278.html
Rizzo, T.; Bergan, K. (2016, July 13). Miami County church pastor and homeless shelter CEO is
charged with sexual molestation of a child. The Kansas City Star. Retrieved from
https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article89333917.html
Robertson, E. (2016, September 23). Jones County associate pastor charged with sexual battery.
WALB News 10. Retrieved from http://www.walb.com/story/33168457/jones-county-
associate-pastor-charged-with-sexual-battery
Romo, S. (2017, October 18). Youth pastor accused of sexually assaulting young congregant.
KTRK. Retrieved from http://abc13.com/youth-pastor-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-
congregant/2550253/
Roney, M. (2017, October 13). Former Prattville youth minister faces child sex charges.
Montgomery Advisor. Retrieved from https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story
/news/2017/10/13/former-prattville-youth-minister-faces-child-sex-charges/763350001/
Rood, L. (2016, August 18). Spencer pastor charged with felony sexual exploitation. Des Moines
Register. Retrieved from https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/investigations
/readers-watchdog/2016/08/18/spencer-pastor-kevin-grimes-charged-felony-sexual-
exploitation-dayspring-assembly-of-god-church-spencer-dream-center/88945192/
Rozelle, J. (2016). Pastor arrested in robbery case. KARK. Retrieved from

https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/pastor-arrested-in-robbery-case/522863240
Ruch, A. (2016, March 21). Southeast MO pastor accused of raping 4 year old. KFVS 12.
Retrieved from http://www.kfvs12.com/story/31527444/southeast-mo-pastor-accused-of-
raping-4-year-old
Rushville pastor arrested for molesting young girls. (2017, October 19). WTHR. Retrieved from
https://www.wthr.com/article/rushville-pastor-arrested-for-molesting-young-girls
Schmidt, G. (2017, March 20). Former Boone pastor arrested for alleged sexual relationship with
girl. Boone News Republican. Retrieved from
http://www.newsrepublican.com/article/20170320/NEWS/303209987
Schultz, J. (2017, February 10). Redding pastor accused of molesting children. Record
Searchlight. Retrieved from https://www.redding.com/story/news/local/2017/02/10
/redding-pastor-accused-molesting-children/97749738/
Self-proclaimed pastor arrested in drug bust. (2016, December 2). LEX18. Retrieved from
http://www.lex18.com/story/33856426/self-proclaimed-pastor-arrested-in-drug-bust
250
Shadrock, C. (2016, July 17). Youth pastor arrested, charged with sexually assaulting teenager.
KSAT 12. Retrieved from https://www.ksat.com/news/youth-pastor-arrested-charged-
with-sexually-assaulting-teenage
Shreveport pastor arrested for soliciting prostitution. (2017, November 30). KTBS. Retrieved
from https://www.ktbs.com/news/shreveport-pastor-arrested-for-soliciting-
prostitution/article_ffa019f4-d641-11e7-8403-0b9e54e2aad2.html
Simeon, C. (2016, November 23). Assistant pastor of Gospel Baptist Church faces sexual battery
charge. WKBN. Retrieved from https://www.wkbn.com/local-news/assistant-pastor-of-
gospel-baptist-church-faces-sexual-battery-charge/1067921412
Smith, D. (2016, April 20). Charges: extremely explicit texts preceded pastor’s arrest. Kenosha
News. Retrieved from http://www.kenoshanews.com/news/charges-extremely-explicit-
texts-preceded-pastor-s-arrest/article_cc8ca7b9-56bc-5d66-8844-71b19d02dc20.html
Snell, R. (2016, June 23). Marengo Co. pastor indicted on sexual abuse charges involving
minors. Alabama News Network. Retrieved from https://www.alabamanews.net
/2016/06/23/marengo-co-pastor-indicted-sexual-abuse-charges-involving-minors/
Sorrell, R. (2016, April 30). Church dissolves as pastor faces rape charges. Bristol Herald
Courier. Retrieved from https://www.heraldcourier.com/news/church-dissolves-as-
pastor-faces-rape-charges/article_3b95b8fd-37b3-5a79-8f79-c6c579a9f0e9.html
South Carolina pastor accused of molesting a minor. (2016, August 5). Fox 8. Retrieved from
https://myfox8.com/2016/08/05/south-carolina-pastor-accused-of-molesting-a-minor/
South Florida preacher arrested for allegedly running sex trafficking ring with teenagers. (2016,
October 20). NBC 6. Retrieved from https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/South-
Florida-Preacher-Arrested-For-Allegedly-Running-Sex-Trafficking-Ring-With-
Teenagers-397616611.html
Stevens, A. (2016, October 6). Pastor charged with child pornography waives hearing. WKOK.
Retrieved from http://wkok.com/pastor-charged-with-child-pornography-waives-hearing/
Stewart, S. (2016, August 24). Former Shawnee youth pastor sentenced for inappropriate texts.
KFOR. Retrieved from https://kfor.com/2016/08/24/former-shawnee-youth-pastor-
sentenced-for-inappropriate-texts/
Stewart, S. (2016, May 23). Pauls Valley teacher arrested after allegedly striking students.
KFOR. Retrieved from https://kfor.com/2016/05/23/pauls-valley-teacher-former-pastor-
arrested-for-child-abuse/
251
Stoiber, T. (2016, December 27). Hales Corners pastor accused of child sex crimes held in
Arizona jail without bail. Journal Sentinel. Retrieved from
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/hales-corners/2016/12/27/hales-corners-
pastor-arrested-arizona/95749506/
Stone, M. (2016, August 19). Texas youth pastor gets life in prison for raping teens. Patheos.
Retrieved from http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist
/2016/08/texas-youth-pastor-gets-life-in-prison-for-raping-teens/
Strong, T. (2017, October 30). Raeford pastor forged check to clear tax debt, police say. WNCN.
Retrieved from https://www.cbs17.com/news/raeford-pastor-forged-check-to-clear-tax-
debt-police-say/1036239610
Suspect accused of sexual conduct with a minor. (2017, December 2). WCBD. Retrieved from
https://www.counton2.com/news/local-news/pastor-charged-of-sexual-conduct-with-a-
minor/1031556427
Swirko, C. (2016, September 7). Marion pastor charged in sexual battery at Micanopy church.
Ocala Star Banner. Retrieved from http://www.ocala.com/news/20160907/marion-
pastor-charged-in-sexual-battery-at-micanopy-church
Ta, L. (2017, March 21). Documents: Former Boone pastor ‘groomed’ teen victim for sexual
relationship. Des Moines Register. Retrieved from https://www.desmoinesregister.com
/story/news/crime-and-courts/2017/03/21/former-boone-pastor-groomed-teen-victim-
sexual-relationship-according-court-documents/99471744/
Taylor, B. (2017, January 3). Pastor sentenced to 4 months jail time, 4 months Huber after
pleading guilty in child sex assault case. Fox 6 Now. Retrieved from
https://fox6now.com/2017/01/03/waukesha-pastor-to-be-sentenced-after-pleading-guilty-
to-sexual-assault-of-a-child/
Taylor, E. (2016, July 3). Mid-South pastor charged with rape. WREG. Retrieved from
https://wreg.com/2016/07/03/mid-south-pastor-charged-with-rape/
Televangelist with ties to Charlotte indicted after Channel 9 investigation. (2017, June 23).
WSOC. Retrieved from https://www.wsoctv.com/news/9-investigates/televangelist-with-
ties-to-charlotte-indicted-after-channel-9-investigation/538032026
Tepfer, D. (2017, February 1). Bishop arrested for illegal power. CT Post. Retrieved from
https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Bishop-arrested-for-illegal-power-10901004.php
Thompson, H. (2017, June 5). Howard looks for pastor accused of big theft. PIX. Retrieved from
https://pix11.com/2017/06/05/howard-looks-for-pastor-accused-of-big-theft/
252
Thornton, W. (2016, January 22). Former Rainbow City youth pastor arrested for producing
pornography. AL.com. Retrieved from https://www.al.com/news/anniston-
gadsden/index.ssf/2016/01/former_youth_pastor_arrested_f.html
Torres, C. (no date). Police arrest McAllen pastor accused sexually assaulting 16-year-old girl.
KGBT. Retrieved from https://valleycentral.com/news/local/police-arrest-mcallen-pastor-
accused-of-sexually-assaulting-16-year-old-girl
Townsend, E. (2017, May 26). SC pastor charged in church arson. The State. Retrieved from
https://www.thestate.com/news/local/article152788544.html
Townsend, E. (2017, August 19). Conway pastor releases statement after gun reportedly found in
bag at airport. Myrtle Beach Online. Retrieved from
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/crime/article168176877.html
Tummond, S. (2017, September 21). Former Cedar Key pastor arrested. Levy County Sheriff’s
Office. Retrieved from http://levycountysheriffsblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/former-cedar-
key-pastor-arrested.html
Update: Minister found guilty in rape trial gets 40 years without parole. (2016, May 19). WSAZ.
Retrieved from http://www.wsaz.com/content/news/Jackson-County-minister-indicted-
on-15-sexual-assault-charges-369714221.html
Update: Stefan Deliramich sentenced on obscene materials charges. (2017, April 13). WTAP.
Retrieved from http://www.thenewscenter.tv/content/news/UPDATE-Former-youth-
pastor-and-girls-soccer-coach-pleads-guilty-to-two-charges-375887551.html
Veklerov, K. (2016, April 26). East Bay minister charged with 23 counts of child sex abuse. SF
Gate. Retrieved from https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/East-Bay-minster-charged-
with-23-counts-of-child-7377296.php
Vendel, C. (2017, June 30). AG’s office nabs three men, including Bible study teacher, in child
sex sting. Penn Live. Retrieved from
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/06/men_charged_sex_sting_westmore.html
Walker, D. (2016, December 9). Yorktown pastor accused of sex with teen. Star Press. Retrieved
from https://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/crime/2016/12/09/yorktown-pastor-
accused-sex-teen/95197474/
Walker, S. (2016, December 6). Genesis Baptist Church pastor found guilty of assault, plans to
appeal. Salisbury Post. Retrieved from https://www.salisburypost.com/2016/12/06
/genesis-baptist-church-pastor-found-guilty-assault-plans-appeal/
Walsh, F. (2016, August 3). Local youth pastor arrested for alleged sexual misconduct with teen
girl. TXK Today. Retrieved from http://txktoday.com/news/local-youth-pastor-arrested-
for-alleged-sexual-misconduct-with-teen-girl/
253
Wang, A. (2016, October 15). Youth pastor arrested at church after admitting he impregnated a
15-year-old, police say. The Washington Post. Retrieved from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/10/15/youth-pastor-
arrested-at-church-after-admitting-he-impregnated-a-15-year-old-police-
say/?utm_term=.1b0bdbc39e35
Watts, L. (2016, October 24). Alexandria pastor, wife charged with $1.2 million congregation
fraud scheme. Fox 5. Retrieved from http://www.fox5dc.com/news/alexandria-pastor-
wife-charged-with-12-million-congregation-fraud-scheme
Wayne Co. pastor behind bars for sexual misconduct. (2016, January 13). WDAM. Retrieved
from http://www.wdam.com/story/30960925/wayne-co-pastor-behind-bars-for-sexual-
misconduct
Weaver, K. (2016, July 22). Church pastor arrested for sexual assault of 8-year-old girl.
NBCDFW. Retrieved from https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Church-Pastor-Arrested-
for-Sexual-Assault-of-8-Year-Old-387934732.html
Webb, J. (2016, February 8). Youth pastor arrested; foster child described 3 years of abuse.
Local 12. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xnQKyexzLk
Wicks, C. (2017, November 16). Canby pastor charged with 9 counts of sex abuse of minor.
KOIN 6. Retrieved from http://www.koin.com/news/canby-pastor-charged-with-9-count-
sex-abuse-of-minor/918009467
Winter Garden pastor accused of running gambling operation in his garage, serving booze to
kids. (2016, September 22). WFTV. Retrieved from
https://www.wftv.com/news/local/winter-garden-pastor-accused-of-running-gambling-
operation-in-his-garage-serving-booze-to-kids/449063479
Woodworth, W. (2016, July 13). Silverton man accused of sex abuse ran ministry. Statesman
Journal. Retrieved from
https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/crime/2016/07/13/silverton-man-accused-
sex-abuse-ran-ministry/86997736/
Woolington, R. (2016, September 16). Hoquiam pastor accused of molesting Oregon girl may
also have abused her sister, records say. The Oregonian. Retrieved from
https://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2016/09/hoquiam_pastor_accus
ed_of_abus.html
Wright, P. (2017, May 18). Former Hackettstown church pastor charged with snapping pictures
up secretary’s skirt. Daily Record. Retrieved from
https://www.dailyrecord.com/story/news/2017/05/18/former-hackettstown-church-pastor-
charged-snapping-pictures-up-secretarys-skirt/330034001/
254
Wytheville man accuses pastor of assaulting him verbally and physically. (2017, September 27).
SWVA Today. Retrieved from https://swvatoday.com/news/article_e0a2bc40-a2f3-11e7-
aabe-0b34d31d5df7.html
Xenia pastor guilty of trying to hire a prostitute. (2017, November 16). WHIO. Retrieved from
https://www.whio.com/news/xenia-pastor-guilty-trying-hire-
prostitute/Gfzuv3ZFPZQSVB5EZOAVLJ/
Youth pastor arrested for child solicitation in Randolph County. (2017, July 19). WISHTV.
Retrieved from https://www.wishtv.com/news/local-news/youth-pastor-arrested-for-
child-solicitation-in-randolph-county/1064223863
Zaimov, S. (2017, May 29). Saddleback Church youth mentor arrested for ‘lewd acts’ with teen
boys; church ‘shocked and grieved.’ Christian Post. Retrieved from
https://www.christianpost.com/news/saddleback-church-youth-mentor-arrested-for-lewd-
acts-with-teen-boys-church-shocked-and-grieved-185536/
Zilka, A. (2016, March 29). Former youth minister accused of oral sex with teen according to
Ripley County court documents. RTV6. Retrieved from
https://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/former-youth-minister-accused-of-
oral-sex-with-teen-according-to-ripley-county-court-documents
255
References
Allen, M. W., & Caillouet, R. H. (1994). Legitimation endeavors: Impression management

strategies used by an organization in crisis. Communication Monographs, 61(1), 44-62.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759409376322
Bean, J. M. & Johnstone, B. (1994). Workplace reasons for saying you’re sorry: Discourse task
management and apology in telephone interviews. Discourse Processes, 17(1), 59-81.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539409544859
Benoit, W. L. (2011) Content analysis in political communications. In E. R. Bucy & R. L.

Holbert (Eds.), The sourcebook for political communication research: Methods,
measures, and analytical techniques (pp. 268-279). London, England: Routledge.
Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/file.PostFileLoader.html?id=55849f0f6225ff9ca68b4611&a
ssetKey=AS%3A273798790615040%401442290126062
Bertrand, J. M. (2007). (Re)thinking worldview: Learning to think, live, and speak in this world.
Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of
impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1080–
1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308324325
Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (1999). Measuring impression management in organizations: A

scale development based on the Jones and Pittman taxonomy. Organizational Research
Methods, 2(2), 187-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819922005
Boyer, L. P. (2002). Extending the crisis -management response repertoire: Using impression
management, attribution, and public relations theories to help deal with organizational
threats (Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(Order No. 3083973).
Bozeman, D. P., & Kacmar, K. M. 1997. A cybernetic model of impression management

processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
69(1), 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2669
Bozzolan, S., Cho, C. H., & Michelon, G. (2015). Impression management and organizational
audiences: The Fiat Group case. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(1), 143-165.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1991-9
Brennan, N. M., Guillamón-Saorín, E., & Pierce, A. (2008). Impression management:

Developing and illustrating a scheme of analysis for narrative disclosures - A
methodological note. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 22(5), 789-832.
Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1284904
Brumfield, K. (2012). Succeeding in crisis leadership. Financial Executive, 45-47. 

256
Caillouet, R. H. (1991). A quest for legitimacy: Impression management strategies used by an

organization in crisis (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (UMI 9200053)
Campbell, C. (2010). Leadership: It’s all about me . . . No, really. Business in Savannah Articles.
Georgia Southern College of Business Administration Publications. Retrieved from
http://coba.georgiasouthern.edu/pdf%20files/2010_02_24_Campbell_Leadership.pdf
Cao, E. S., Schniederjans, D., & Schniederjans, M. (2013). Enhancing financial performance
with social media: An impression management perspective. Decision Support Systems,
55(4), 911–918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.12.027
Carson, A. M. (2013). Secrecy, acknowledgement, and war escalation: A study in covert

competition (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
Global. (Order No. 3673539)
Cialdini, R. B. (1989). Indirect tactics of image management: Beyond basking. In R. A.

Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression management in the organization (pp. 45-
56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 
Crant, J. M. (1996). Doing more harm than good: When is impression management likely to
evoke a negative response? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(16), 1454- 1471.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb00080.x
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Cheney, G., & McMillan, J. J. (1990). Organizational rhetoric and the practice of criticism.
Journal of Applied Communication Research, 18(2), 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1080
/00909889009360318  
Chilcutt, A. S. (2009). The “reality” of Southwest: A content analysis of managing

organizational impression tactics during a season of “Airline.” Public Relations Journal,
3(3), 1-22.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
Colon, D. E. & Murray, N. M. (1996). Customer perceptions of corporate responses to product

complaints: The role of explanations. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 1040-
1056. https://doi.org/10.5465/256723
Connelly, J. (2014, October 19). The pastor’s “persistent sinful behavior”: Why Driscoll quit
Mars Hill [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2014/10/19
/the-pastors-persistent-sinful-behavior-why-driscoll-quit-mars-hill/
257
Craig, R. J., & Brennan, N. M. (2012). An exploration of the relationship between language
choice in CEO letters to shareholders and corporate reputation. Accounting Forum, 36(3),
166–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2012.02.004
Craig, R., Mortensen, T., & Iyer, S. (2013). Exploring top management language for signals of
possible deception: The words of Satyam’s Chair Ramalinga Raju. Journal of Business
Ethics, 113(2), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1307-5
Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1991). Group decision making under stress. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 76(3), 473-478. 
Elsbach, K. D. (1994). Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The
construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly,
39(1), 57-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393494
Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Members’ responses to organizational identity threats:
Encountering and countering the business week rankings. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41(3), 442-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393938
Elsbach, K. D., & Sutton, R. I. (1992). Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate
actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of
Management Journal, 35(4), 699-738. https://doi.org/10.2307/256313
Elsbach, K. D., Sutton, R. I., & Principe, K. E. 1998. Averting expected challenges through
anticipatory impression management: A study of hospital billing. Organization Science,
9(1), 68-86. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.1.68
Foushee, H. C, & Helmreich, R. L. (1988). Group interaction and flight crew performance. In E.
L. Wiener & D. C. Nagel (Eds.), Human factors in aviation. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Furner, C., Hall, A., Royle, T., & Zinko, R., (2010). Self-perceptions of our personal reputations:
The mediating role of image in the development of organizational citizenship behaviors.
Journal of International Management Studies, 5(1), 1–9.
Gardner, W. L. (1992). Lessons in organizational dramaturgy: The art of impression

management. Organizational Dynamics, 21(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-
2616(92)90084-z
Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J. (1988). Impression management in organizations. Journal of

Management, 14(2), 321-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638801400210
Giacalone, R. A., Riordan, C. A., & Rosenfeld, P. (1995). Impression management in

organizations. London, England: Routledge.
258
Gilbert, D. T., & Silvera, D. H. (1996.) Overhelping. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 70(4), 678-690. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.70.4.678
Ginzel, L. E., Kramer, R. M., & Sutton, R. I. (1993.) Organizational impression management as
a reciprocal influence process: The neglected role of the organizational audience. In L. L.
Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series
of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 15, pp. 227-266). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Godly Response to Abuse in a Christian Environment. (2010). Amended final report: for the
investigatory review of child abuse at New Tribes Fanda Missionary School. Retrieved
from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54596334e4b0780b44555981/t
/54710157e4b0ed0573819221/1416692055303/final_report_and_recommendations.pdf
Godly Response to Abuse in a Christian Environment. (2014). Final report: For the investigatory
review of sexual abuse disclosures and institutional responses at Bob Jones University.
Retrieved from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54596334e4b0780b44555981/t
/552e9be7e4b0498e9c4b8c24/1429117927390/Bob+Jones+U+Final+Report.pdf
Goodwin, C. & Ross, I. (1992). Consumer responses to service failures: Influence of procedural
and interactional fairness perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 25(2), 149-
163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(92)90014-3
Graffin, S. D., Haleblian, J., & Kiley, J. T. (2016). Ready, aim, acquire: Impression offsetting
and acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 59(1), 232-252.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0288
Greenberg, J. (1990). Looking fair vs. being fair: Managing impressions of organizational
justice. In B. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol.
12, pp. 111-157). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Hall, J. A., Pennington, N., & Lueders, A. (2013). Impression management and formation on
Facebook: A lens model approach. New Media & Society, 16(6), 958-982.
Hamblin, R. L. (1958). Leadership and crisis. Sociometry, 21, 322-335.
Hermann, C. F. (1963). Some consequences of crisis which limit the viability of

organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 8(1), 61-82.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2390887
Hermann, C. F. (Ed.) (1972). International crises: Insights from behavioral research. New York,
NY: The Free Press, 1972.
Hewlin, P. F. (2003). And the award for best actor goes to…: Facades of conformity in
organizational settings. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI
No. 3102529)
259
Highhouse S., Brooks, M.E., & Gregarus G. (2009) An organizational impression management
perspective on the formation of corporate reputations. Journal of Management, 35(6),
1481–1493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309348788
Hodgins, H. S., Liebeskind, E., & Schwartz, W. (1996). Getting out of hot water: Facework in
social predicaments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 300- 314.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.71.2.300
Holman Christian Standard Bible Study Bible. (2010). Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers.
Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management: New

perspectives why companies engaged in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business
Ethics, 27, 55-68.
Howell, D. C. (2009). Statistical methods for psychology (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage
Learning.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Huang, S. Y., Huang, S. M., Wu, T. H., & Hsieh, T. Y. (2011). The data quality evaluation of
graph information. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 51(4), 81–91.
Isley, Paul J. (1997). Child sexual abuse and the Catholic church: An historical and
contemporary review. Pastoral Psychology, 45(4) 277–299.
https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02282657
Jenkins, A., Anandarajan, M., & D’Ovidio, R. (2014). ‘All that glitters is not gold’: The role
of impression management in data breach notification. Western Journal of
Communication, 78(3), 337-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2013.866686
Johnson, C. E. (2012). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or shadow
(4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation.
In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (pp. 231-262). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jones, Q. (2016, January 7). Hattiesburg pastor charged with sexual battery under house
arrest. Retrieved from http://raycomnbc.worldnow.com/story/30912014 /hattiesburg-
pastor-charged-with-sexual-battery-under-house-arrest
Jordan, G. (2016, April 19). Judge reschedules hearing for man facing sexual abuse charges.
Retrieved from http://www.bdtonline.com/news/judge-reschedules-hearing-for-man-
facing-sexual-abuse-charges/article_5d82fbb2-05de-11e6-930e-3739e17cbc68.html
260
Kacmar, K. M., Harris, K. J., & Nagy, B. G. (2007). Further validation of the Bolino and Turnley
Impression Management Scale. Journal of Applied Behavioral Management, 9(1), 16-32.
Katz, I. (1970). Experimental studies in negro-white relationships. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),

Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 71-117). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Kayes, D. C. (2004). The 1996 Mount Everest climbing disaster: the breakdown of learning in
teams. Human Relations, 57(10), 1263–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726704048355
Knight, G. R. (2006). Philosophy & education: An introduction in Christian perspective (4th

ed.). Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.
Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Lamertz, K., & Martens, M. L. (2011). How do we make you look good? A social network study
of upstream organizational impression management and the rhetorical construction of
IPO firm images. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28(4), 373-387.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.193
Landau, M., & Chisholm, D. (1995). The arrogance of optimism: notes on failure-avoidance
management. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 3(2), 67–80.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.1995.tb00059.x
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-
component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34-47. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-
2909.107.1.34
Lee, J. D. (2014). A different take on impression management: A study of sport management

faculty and their use of tactics in combination (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 3636190)
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2012). Practical research: Planning and design (10th ed.).
London, England: Pearson.
Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass
communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human
Communication Research, 28(4), 587-604. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/28.4.587
Maitlis, S. & Sonenshein, S. (2010). Sensemaking in crisis and change: inspiration and insights
from Weick (1998). Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 551-580.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00908.x
Mabilag, P. (2016, January 7). NYC pastor charged for stealing church money says he was
underpaid. Christianity Today. Retrieved from https://www.christiantoday.com/article
/nyc.pastor.charged.for.stealing.church.money.says.he.was.underpaid/75824.htm
261
Marcus, A. A. & Goodman, R. S. (1991). Victims and shareholders: The dilemmas of presenting
corporate policy during a crisis. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 281-305.
https://doi.org/10.5465/256443
Mawby, R. C. (2014) The presentation of police in everyday life: Police-press relations,

impression management and the Leveson Inquiry. Crime, Media, Culture: An
International Journal, 10(3), 239-257.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659014558433
McDonnell, M., & King, B. (2013). Keeping up appearances: Reputational threat and impression
management after social movement boycotts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(3),
387–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213500032
McLaughlin, M. L., Cody, M. J., & Rosenstein, N. E. (1983). Account sequences in

conversations between strangers. Communication Monographs, 50(2), 102-125.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758309390157
Mohamed, A., & Gardner, W. (2004). An exploratory study of interorganizational defamation:

An organizational impression management perspective. Organizational Analysis, 12(2),
129-145. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028989
Mohamed, A., Gardner, W., & Paolillo, J. (1999). A taxonomy of organizational impression
management tactics. Advances in Competitiveness Research, 7(1), 108–130.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Northouse, P. J. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
O’Keefe, P., & Conway, S. (2008). Impression management and legitimacy in an NGO
government. (University of Tasmania School of Accounting & Corporate Governance
Working Paper Series, 2). Retrieved from
http://eprints.utas.edu.au/6193/1/OKeefeConwayForAuthorReview.pdf
Patelli, L., & Pedrini, M. (2013). Is the optimism in CEO’s letters to shareholders sincere?
Impression management versus communicative action during the economic crisis.
Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1855-3
Parhankangas, A., & Ehrlich, M. (2012). If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say
anything at all: How blasting the competition affects your chances of raising business
angel funding. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 32(1), 1.
Pazmino, R. W. (2008). Foundational issues on Christian education: An introduction in

evangelical perspective (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Pollach, I., & Kerbler, E. (2011). Appearing competent: A study of impression management in
U.S. and European CEO profiles. Journal of Business Communication, 48(4), 355–372.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943611414687
262
Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the
role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433-458.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.21794663
Reed, B. (2016, September 21). Colorado church didn’t report pastor’s child sex abuse because
‘biblical counseling’ would suffice. Raw Story. Retrieved from
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/colorado-church-didnt-report-pastors-child-sex-abuse-
because-biblical-counseling-would-suffice/
Reilly, A. H. (1987). Are organizations ready for crisis? A managerial scorecard. Columbia
Journal of World Business, 22(1), 79-88.
Riordan, C. A., Marlin, N. A., & Kellogg, R. T. (1983). The effectiveness of accounts following
transgressions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46(3), 213-219.
Roth, D. L., Snyder, C. R., & Pace, L. M. (1986). Dimensions of favorable self-presentation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(4), 867-874.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.4.867
Scher, S. J. & Darley, J. M. (1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects
of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26(1),
127-140.
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Scott, M. B., & Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33(1), 46-62.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2092239
Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 19(3), 321–325. https://doi.org/10.1086/266577
Smith. S. H. & Whitehead, G. I. (1988). The public and private use of consensus-raising excuses.
Journal of Personality, 56(2), 355-371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
6494.1988.tb00890.x
Snyder, C. R., & Higgins, R. L. (1988). Excuses: Their effective role in the negotiation of reality.
Psychological Bulletin, 104(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.104.1.23
Shrivastava, P. (1987). Bhopal: Anatomy of a crisis. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Shrivastava, P., & Mitroff, I. I. (1987). Strategic management of corporate crises. Columbia
Journal of World Business, 22(1), 5-11.
Smietana, B. (2015, November 19). What is an evangelical? Four questions offer new definition.
Christianity Today. Retrieved from: http://www.christianitytoday.com/news
/2015/november/what-is-evangelical-new-definition-nae-lifeway-research.html
263
Stanley, T. (2016, February 14). The sex-abuse scandal that devastated a suburban megachurch:
Inside the rise and fall of Sovereign Grace Ministries. The Washingtonian. Retrieved
from https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/02/14/the-sex-abuse-scandal-that-devastated-
a-suburban-megachurch-sovereign-grace-ministries/
Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat-rigidity effects in organizational
behavior: A multi-level analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 501- 524.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2392337
Tedeschi, J. T., & Melburg, V. (1984). Impression management and influence in the
organization. In S. B. Bacharach & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Research in the sociology of
organizations (Vol. 3, pp. 31-58). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Tedeschi, J. T., & Reiss, M. (1981). Identities, the phenomenal self, and laboratory research. In J.
T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Impression management theory and social psychological research (pp.
3-22). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Tedeschi, J. T., & Rosenfeld, P. (1981). Impression management theory and the forced
compliance situation. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Impression management theory and social
psychological research (pp. 147-180). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Tetlock, P. C., Saar-Tsechansky, M., & Macskassy, S. (2008). More than words: Quantifying
language to measure firms’ fundamentals. The Journal of Finance, 63(3), 1437–467.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2008.01362.x
Tseelon, E. (1992). Is the presented self sincere? Goffman, impression management and the
postmodern self. Theory, Culture, & Society, 9(2), 115-128.
https://doi.org/10.1177/026327692009002006
Tyler, J. M., Connaughton, S. L., Desrayaud, N., & Fedesco, H. N. (2012). Organizational
impression management: Utilizing anticipatory tactics. Basic and Applied Social
Psychology, 34(4), 336–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2012.693449
Turnley, W., & Bolino, M. (2001). Achieving desired images while avoiding undesired images:
Exploring the role of self-monitoring in impression management. Journal of Applied
Psychology 86(2), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.2.351
Vielhaber, M. E., & Waltman, J. L. (2008). Changing uses of technology: Crisis communication
responses in a faculty strike. Journal of Business Communication, 45(3), 308–330.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608317112
Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.
264
Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies,

25(4), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00039.x
Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393339
Weick, K. (1996). Prepare your organization to fight fires. Harvard Business Review, 3, 143.
Wood, R.E., & Mitchell, T.R. (1981). Managerial behavior in a social context: The impact of
impression management on attributions and disciplinary actions. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 28(3), 356-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-
5073(81)90004-0
Zaharopoulos, D. (2015). An exploration of organizational impression management in social

media: A Twitter analysis of large law firms (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 3684974)

IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES by Wade Mullen PHD Dissertation PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES by Wade Mullen PHD Dissertation PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Copyright © 2018 Wade Mullen. All Rights Reserved.

IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED

BY EVANGELICAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE

WAKE OF AN IMAGE-THREATENING EVENT

Capital Seminary and Graduate School

Of the Requirements for the Degree

IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED BY

EVANGELICAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE WAKE

Read and Approved by:

my wife, best friend, partner, and ally.

Thank you for supporting me, cheering for me, and

keeping me focused on the things that matter most.

This work is also dedicated to my children

Maya Elizabeth, Wyatt James, and Haven Joy.

May you grow up to be truth-tellers.

God of great grace through this process.

would provide our every need.

the levity, the example, and the challenge.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..........................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. viii

Introduction to the Research Problem.....................................................................1

The Issue of Crisis .......................................................................................3

The Issue of Impression Management .........................................................4

IM in Response to Crisis ..............................................................................6

The Problem of IM and Evangelical Organizations ...................................8

The Research Gap ........................................................................................9

Research Purpose ...................................................................................................12

Research Questions ................................................................................................12

Delimitations of the Study .....................................................................................13

Research Assumptions ...........................................................................................15

Procedural Overview .............................................................................................16

Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................17

2. PRECEDENT LITERATURE .......................................................................................18

Philosophical Foundations .....................................................................................19

Philosophical Presuppositions ...................................................................19

Theological Foundations ........................................................................................23

Theological Perspectives of Leadership and IM .........................................24

Development of OIM Theory ....................................................................33

Threats to Organizational Image ................................................................34

The Nature of a Crisis ................................................................................36

Historical Background of OIM ..............................................................................45

Evolution from IM to OIM ........................................................................46

Primary Areas of OIM Research................................................................55

OIM in the Wake of Image-threatening Events .....................................................56

The Marine Shale Processing Crisis ..........................................................56

The Elsbach Studies ...................................................................................58

The Findings of Marcus and Goodman .....................................................62

The Findings of McDonnell and King .......................................................64

Biblical Foundations of Leadership and IM ..........................................................66

Biblical Narrative of IM and OIM ............................................................67

Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................79

3. METHODOLOGICAL DESIGN ...................................................................................81

Research Question Synopsis ..................................................................................81

Limitations of Generalization ................................................................................84

Research Method ...................................................................................................85

Data Collection Phase ................................................................................87

Creation of a Coding Frame Phase ............................................................88

Data Coding Phase .....................................................................................89

Methods of Analysis ..................................................................................91

Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................92

4. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS ..........................................................................................93